Airline Pilot Forums

Airline Pilot Forums was designed to be a community where working airline pilots can share ideas and information about the aviation field. In the forum you will find information about major and regional airline carriers, career training, interview and job seeker help, finance, and living the airline pilot lifestyle.




View Full Version : Legalized Marijuana and the FAA


Floobs
04-21-2018, 09:59 AM
I was reading that by the end of this year that roughly half the states could have legalized recreational marijuana. I also read that it looks now that President Trump and Senator Schumer are both open to and actively looking to decriminalize it on a federal level.

The question is when and if that does happen on a national scale what will the FAA do in regards to regulation in the field of aviation?


freezingflyboy
04-21-2018, 10:21 AM
I suspect that after an exhaustive, lengthy (and most likely asinine) study period where they spend millions paying guys to get stoned and go play in a simulator, they will establish some testable level of THC that can be present in the blood or urine. Or time periods like certain medications. Planes won't fall from the sky and pilots won't be raiding the snack bars at airports above previous levels. Life will go on.

SonicFlyer
04-21-2018, 10:52 AM
Good.

MMJ is much healthier than alcohol, depending on how it is ingested.


TiredSoul
04-21-2018, 11:09 AM
Good.

MMJ is much healthier than alcohol, depending on how it is ingested.

Safer for FOís and FAís also....

(Too soon?)

TimetoClimb
04-21-2018, 11:28 AM
Also a reliable means of testing that detects THC present in the bloodstream has yet to be developed. Urinalysis detects THC weeks after the effects are gone.

pokey9554
04-21-2018, 11:54 AM
There’s already a test to determine if someone is under the influence of marijuana.

Put them in a waiting room with a bowl of Cheetos. If the Cheetos are gone when the test administrator re-enters, they fail.

Floobs
04-21-2018, 12:27 PM
Imagine if some of these baby boomer pilots were able to smoke a joint every now and then. It would be like a metamorphosis for some of these people.

Han Solo
04-21-2018, 12:29 PM
I suspect that after an exhaustive, lengthy (and most likely asinine) study period where they spend millions paying guys to get stoned and go play in a simulator, they will establish some testable level of THC that can be present in the blood or urine. Or time periods like certain medications. Planes won't fall from the sky and pilots won't be raiding the snack bars at airports above previous levels. Life will go on.

It's easier to say no. Government employees (generally) aren't renowned for their motivation to go above and beyond. My guess is no weed for pilots for a VERY long time. I retire in 18 years. I'll bet a bag of Cool Ranch Doritos that my 1st joint will probably be the day after I retire and not a day sooner (or later).

trip
04-21-2018, 01:06 PM
On a side note, does anyone else have a problem being tested by a guy with a backpack in a public restroom? These "testers" or duty gazers as we called them in the military probably have 1.5 hours of CBT's to become qualified collectors.

M5000
04-21-2018, 03:06 PM
How about the CBD oil? Any idea if that will cause a positive test. Theyíre selling it as a great pain reliever.

OpenClimb
04-21-2018, 03:11 PM
Thereís already a test to determine if someone is under the influence of marijuana.

Put them in a waiting room with a bowl of Cheetos. If the Cheetos are gone when the test administrator re-enters, they fail.

Iíve never smoked anything and Iíd fail that test 9 times out of 10. Love me some Cheetos!

Air Stang 7
04-21-2018, 05:04 PM
Result:
https://youtube.com/watch?v=HNMq8XS4LhE

rickair7777
04-21-2018, 05:38 PM
I was reading that by the end of this year that roughly half the states could have legalized recreational marijuana. I also read that it looks now that President Trump and Senator Schumer are both open to and actively looking to decriminalize it on a federal level.

The question is when and if that does happen on a national scale what will the FAA do in regards to regulation in the field of aviation?

Just because it's legal does not mean the government and/or employers can't restrict it's use.

With alcohol it's easy to measure if someone is likely impaired, or at least there's a known equitable, empirical standard that you have to meet.

Until a similar test exists for THC impairment, I would expect it's use to be banned by all in safety-sensitive positions. The current test just shows whether you blazed up within the last month or so.

crflyer
04-21-2018, 08:18 PM
On a side note, does anyone else have a problem being tested by a guy with a backpack in a public restroom? These "testers" or duty gazers as we called them in the military probably have 1.5 hours of CBT's to become qualified collectors.

Absolutely. I had a guy say he drove in just to test me. It was just him and his little bag. It was extremely unsettling.

trip
04-21-2018, 08:22 PM
Absolutely. I had a guy say he drove in just to test me. It was just him and his little bag. It was extremely unsettling.

Yeah, seems very unprofessional. I remember testing being done in a more controlled environment, lab or clinic setting.
Why the ambush style, march to the bathroom, whip out or else....?

jcountry
04-22-2018, 04:09 AM
Yeah, seems very unprofessional. I remember testing being done in a more controlled environment, lab or clinic setting.
Why the ambush style, march to the bathroom, whip out or else....?

Ding ding ding!

I know the answer:

Iím always amazed at people who post stupid stuff on Facebook or Instagram showing them drunk as a 9-eyed skunk, and a while later they start crying about their drug tests.

ďRandom,Ē my ass. People with stupid social media stuff get tested way more often.

(A surprising number of people will post anything and everything there. No filter installed.)

AC560
04-22-2018, 05:51 AM
Iím always amazed at people who post stupid stuff on Facebook or Instagram showing them drunk as a 9-eyed skunk, and a while later they start crying about their drug test

Can confirm that as management scum. The reasoning is simple the company is responsible for your actions. So when you blaze up and hurt Joe Public in a related or unrelated incident, it costs the company.

I like my bonus and some weed smoking employee making the news costs me money. Managers like $$$ just as much as pilots.

jcountry
04-22-2018, 06:00 AM
Can confirm that as management scum. The reasoning is simple the company is responsible for your actions. So when you blaze up and hurt Joe Public in a related or unrelated incident, it costs the company.

I like my bonus and some weed smoking employee making the news costs me money. Managers like $$$ just as much as pilots.

Itís understandable.

Lawyers could have a field day with some of the posts I have seen. At least the company covers its ass when it can produce clean drug tests. (And probably fire some idiots who really are drunk/high.)

I just donít get why anyone posts stupid crap on social media like that. I guess younger generations think it wonít matter. Maybe they really think only their Ďfriendsí can see it.

Either way, they are wrong.

Airhoss
04-22-2018, 06:28 AM
How about the CBD oil? Any idea if that will cause a positive test. Theyíre selling it as a great pain reliever.

Yes it will cause a positive test.

John Carr
04-22-2018, 07:59 AM
Yeah, seems very unprofessional. I remember testing being done in a more controlled environment, lab or clinic setting.
Why the ambush style, march to the bathroom, whip out or else....?

Absolutely. I had a guy say he drove in just to test me. It was just him and his little bag. It was extremely unsettling.

Drug testers must have given up scope.

Now its outsourced to kids wearing earbuds carrying backpacks to work.......

PowderFinger
04-22-2018, 08:10 AM
It's easier to say no. Government employees (generally) aren't renowned for their motivation to go above and beyond. My guess is no weed for pilots for a VERY long time. I retire in 18 years. I'll bet a bag of Cool Ranch Doritos that my 1st joint will probably be the day after I retire and not a day sooner (or later).

I have a bong waiting for the day ... Less than 2 years to go ... Regular Doritos for me. :cool:

Karnak
04-22-2018, 11:00 AM
Remember the good ol' days when mention of the "pot hole on Main Street" referred to asphalt damage?

Common sense must be legislated because too many members of our profession think some rules don't apply to them. If and when the DOT can come up with way to test/control the use of marijuana, and the trend continues toward permissiveness, it'll happen.

galaxy flyer
04-23-2018, 07:05 AM
Schumer can have his pipe dream, but it ain’t happening at the Federal level. The bureaucracy from DEA to the penitentiary system has way too much budget involved to let go. Business isn’t to only group with lobbyists.


GF

teddy3412
04-23-2018, 10:16 AM
How about the CBD oil? Any idea if that will cause a positive test. Theyíre selling it as a great pain reliever.

I've heard they make 100% thc free cbd oil.

Excargodog
04-23-2018, 11:12 AM
On a side note, does anyone else have a problem being tested by a guy with a backpack in a public restroom? These "testers" or duty gazers as we called them in the military probably have 1.5 hours of CBT's to become qualified collectors.

Watching someone pee is scarcely rocket science. Gathering it may be a hit or miss proposition, but neither is likely to cause a false positive.

AC560
04-23-2018, 04:16 PM
Watching someone pee is scarcely rocket science. Gathering it may be a hit or miss proposition, but neither is likely to cause a false positive.

They also split the sample so if it is positive you get round 2 with no issues. If that is positive you have the option of more exacting testing (e.g. hair). Nobody is failing tests due to the test they are failing cause they due drugs.

Xheyaane
04-24-2018, 01:38 AM
Colorado is one of the lucky states in America who has been legalized the marijuana. And i don't see any problem about this because it gives us a lot of benefits upon checking the net I saw this article Cannabis Is Legal In DC, But Not For Everyone - GreenMed (http://www.greenmed.io/blog/cannabis-legal-dc-not-everyone/) that Colorado is one of the few places where cannabis consumption for funsies is allowed. Itís not that way for everyone though. Cannabis is still a Schedule I drug, so naturally, this makes things a little complicated for people living in public housing, but it helps the industry also

Airhoss
04-24-2018, 06:18 AM
They also split the sample so if it is positive you get round 2 with no issues. If that is positive you have the option of more exacting testing (e.g. hair). Nobody is failing tests due to the test they are failing cause they due drugs.

Due they now how too spell when they due drugs?

AC560
04-24-2018, 05:20 PM
Due they now how too spell when they due drugs?

Checkmate....

7Thirty7s4Life
04-30-2018, 09:47 AM
Yes it will cause a positive test.

wrong you are

rickair7777
04-30-2018, 11:38 AM
wrong you are

He's right... sometimes. Depends on which CBD oil you use, and how much.

The military bans it because they don't want drug test results being questioned because of claims of CBD use.

If you pop positive on a DOT test, waving a bottle pf CBD in their face is not going to save your job. But the upside is you can smoke anything you want after the FAA shreds your certs.

2StgTurbine
04-30-2018, 12:37 PM
Do whatever you want. Grow a beard, stick your head out of the flight deck window and take a selfie, go to Denver and eat some edibles. Just be sure to post it online.

Frankly, it does not bother me one bit. People like that allow for more movement in seniority lists, make room in the industry for those who actually deserve it, and make me look good. As a former check airman told me, "Don't complain about the idiots in our pilot group. Without them, we might be in the bottom half of the bell curve."

Frankie Avalon
04-30-2018, 04:33 PM
It's a pretty interesting thought experiment.

If (and that's a big if) marijuana is completely legalized, for argument's sake, does the FAA or an employer have the right to dictate that a pilot may not, under any circumstance, partake in it's use? Let's say that Wayfarer Airlines instituted a strict 'no alcohol' policy for it's flight crew. No crewmember may, at any time while employed, ingest alcohol. And there are random tests conducted that could detect use as far back as 90 days. Would they have a legal leg to stand on?

Certainly there would be limitations on it's recency of use or the prohibition of actually being impaired while operating just like with alcohol currently. But even with the 8-hour rule, you need some very specific evidence to catch someone on that. Like eyewitnesses or video that proves it was ingested within the window (which I'm sure has happened). More likely, people get caught for actually being impaired and get violated on that. With the detection window for marijuana use so broad, would it be legal to jam someone up for, say, smoking over a vacation period 6 weeks prior?

I think there may be a lot of interesting legal trials if this actually comes to fruition.

rickair7777
04-30-2018, 06:08 PM
It's a pretty interesting thought experiment.

If (and that's a big if) marijuana is completely legalized, for argument's sake, does the FAA or an employer have the right to dictate that a pilot may not, under any circumstance, partake in it's use? Let's say that Wayfarer Airlines instituted a strict 'no alcohol' policy for it's flight crew. No crewmember may, at any time while employed, ingest alcohol. And there are random tests conducted that could detect use as far back as 90 days. Would they have a legal leg to stand on?

Certainly there would be limitations on it's recency of use or the prohibition of actually being impaired while operating just like with alcohol currently. But even with the 8-hour rule, you need some very specific evidence to catch someone on that. Like eyewitnesses or video that proves it was ingested within the window (which I'm sure has happened). More likely, people get caught for actually being impaired and get violated on that. With the detection window for marijuana use so broad, would it be legal to jam someone up for, say, smoking over a vacation period 6 weeks prior?

I think there may be a lot of interesting legal trials if this actually comes to fruition.

Nothing interesting at all. Just because it's not illegal doesn't mean you have some inherent right to use it. An employer could certainly ban the use of any substance they wanted, particularly for safety-sensitive employees.

An employer could ban all alcohol use as well, but then they would have trouble finding employees, and the public would think they were over the top. At least one airline bans nicotine use (although it's only enforced at the time of hire).

Actually DOT would maintain the current ban anyway, unless someone came up with a way to measure actual impairment, like a breathalyzer (current tests just show if you've used it in the last month or so).

2StgTurbine
04-30-2018, 06:17 PM
Nothing interesting at all. Just because it's not illegal doesn't mean you have some inherent right to use it. An employer could certainly ban the use of any substance they wanted, particularly for safety-sensitive employees.

...At least one airline bans nicotine use (although it's only enforced at the time of hire).

They can only ban you from using a substance or being under the influence of a substance when you are ON DUTY, but they cannot ban you from using a LEGAL substance when you are off duty. But most on this board will be retired before any policy allows an airline pilot to use any form marijuana. First, the federal government has to allow it, then the DOT must create some type of regulation, then an employer would either have to allow it, or an employee would have to challenge the policy in court.

rickair7777
04-30-2018, 06:59 PM
They can only ban you from using a substance or being under the influence of a substance when you are ON DUTY, but they cannot ban you from using a LEGAL substance when you are off duty.

Sure they can. Just because it's legal doesn't mean employers have to let you do it.

The first amendment ensures that free speech is legal, but try speaking freely in public about your employer in a negative light and see how long you last. Employers can do almost anything that's not PROHIBITED by law... if you don't like you can always quit.

Hrkdrivr
04-30-2018, 08:04 PM
They can only ban you from using a substance or being under the influence of a substance when you are ON DUTY, but they cannot ban you from using a LEGAL substance when you are off duty.

The DOT/FAA can too. They prohibit pilots from taking numerous otherwise legal drugs while exercising the privileges of their certificates.

AKpilot
05-01-2018, 10:00 AM
A friend of mine had major surgery and was out for a few months. They used cbd cartridges from a legal dispensary to reduce the use of opioid pain meds. They had the blessing of their doctor. If you go to a legal dispensary and ask for cbd for pain, it usually has a small percentage of thc. Look up "entourage effect of cbd/thc". My friend used the 10 to 1 cbd/thc vape cartridges for about 6 weeks after surgery while using much smaller amounts of prescribed opioids. 5-10 puffs a day. It also comes in other forms like lozenges and oil. When you are done with pain mitigation, You can go to Walmart and buy a THC drug test kit for $12. Pee in the cup after 5 mins you will know if you pass. Don't go to work till you pass. If you don't pass, wait a week and do it again. I've read it can 4-6 weeks of being pot free for chronic users of regular pot which has high thc to pass a pee test. Watch the last CNN episode "Weed 4" for some current info on medical use of pot.

It works and opioids can be very bad. No one has died from a pot OD. But I think it will be years before the feds will loosen the control of it. AG Jeff Sessions is a big obstacle right now. I'm sure Big Pharma lobbyists are against it too.

rickair7777
05-01-2018, 11:13 AM
A friend of mine had major surgery and was out for a few months. They used cbd cartridges from a legal dispensary to reduce the use of opioid pain meds. They had the blessing of their doctor. If you go to a legal dispensary and ask for cbd for pain, it usually has a small percentage of thc. Look up "entourage effect of cbd/thc". My friend used the 10 to 1 cbd/thc vape cartridges for about 6 weeks after surgery while using much smaller amounts of prescribed opioids. 5-10 puffs a day. It also comes in other forms like lozenges and oil. When you are done with pain mitigation, You can go to Walmart and buy a THC drug test kit for $12. Pee in the cup after 5 mins you will know if you pass. Don't go to work till you pass. If you don't pass, wait a week and do it again. I've read it can 4-6 weeks of being pot free for chronic users of regular pot which has high thc to pass a pee test. Watch the last CNN episode "Weed 4" for some current info on medical use of pot.

It works and opioids can be very bad. No one has died from a pot OD. But I think it will be years before the feds will loosen the control of it. AG Jeff Sessions is a big obstacle right now. I'm sure Big Pharma lobbyists are against it too.

Good advice, I agree it's far less risky than opioids. Although this only works if you have a significant medical condition that allows to stay out on med leave. Ongoing use for routine aches and pains could be dangerous career-wise.

Qotsaautopilot
05-01-2018, 12:19 PM
A friend of mine had major surgery and was out for a few months. They used cbd cartridges from a legal dispensary to reduce the use of opioid pain meds. They had the blessing of their doctor. If you go to a legal dispensary and ask for cbd for pain, it usually has a small percentage of thc. Look up "entourage effect of cbd/thc". My friend used the 10 to 1 cbd/thc vape cartridges for about 6 weeks after surgery while using much smaller amounts of prescribed opioids. 5-10 puffs a day. It also comes in other forms like lozenges and oil. When you are done with pain mitigation, You can go to Walmart and buy a THC drug test kit for $12. Pee in the cup after 5 mins you will know if you pass. Don't go to work till you pass. If you don't pass, wait a week and do it again. I've read it can 4-6 weeks of being pot free for chronic users of regular pot which has high thc to pass a pee test. Watch the last CNN episode "Weed 4" for some current info on medical use of pot.

It works and opioids can be very bad. No one has died from a pot OD. But I think it will be years before the feds will loosen the control of it. AG Jeff Sessions is a big obstacle right now. I'm sure Big Pharma lobbyists are against it too.

Iím for just about anything that gets people off of opioid pain killers. Those things are so addictive and are ruining lives.

However, what you are saying would involve lying on your medical certificate application.

The marijuana laws are way out of whack with logic and public opinion

galaxy flyer
05-01-2018, 07:36 PM
AKpilot,

I donít know what surgery had, but I had a crushed vertebrae, which at the time felt like someone was trying to rip it out of my spine. Operated on two days, off the morphine in 36 hours and oral pain meds in 72 hours. Suck it up.

GF

rickair7777
05-01-2018, 08:09 PM
Operated on two days, off the morphine in 36 hours and oral pain meds in 72 hours. Suck it up.


Some people can do that (I can, and have, and vastly prefer a little pain to being doped up with fun side effects). But some people can't.

sailingfun
05-04-2018, 03:53 AM
They can only ban you from using a substance or being under the influence of a substance when you are ON DUTY, but they cannot ban you from using a LEGAL substance when you are off duty. But most on this board will be retired before any policy allows an airline pilot to use any form marijuana. First, the federal government has to allow it, then the DOT must create some type of regulation, then an employer would either have to allow it, or an employee would have to challenge the policy in court.

The FAA cab and does ban you from using anything they want when off duty. Next time you get your medical done toss a few of their banned drugs on the form and see how they respond.

pokey9554
05-04-2018, 04:21 AM
It took the FAA roughly 8 years to allow passengers to turn their cell phones on in airplane mode. When the latest Southwest incident happened, the FAA said they would issue an inspection order within two weeks. I donít really expect them or any other government organization to do anything revolutionary in a timely manner. By timely manner, I mean ever.

Aero1900
05-04-2018, 09:12 PM
It took the FAA roughly 8 years to allow passengers to turn their cell phones on in airplane mode. When the latest Southwest incident happened, the FAA said they would issue an inspection order within two weeks. I donít really expect them or any other government organization to do anything revolutionary in a timely manner. By timely manner, I mean ever.

Exactly right. And this is why I'm not worried about single pilot, remotely operated or autonomous airliners.

2StgTurbine
05-06-2018, 04:08 AM
The FAA cab and does ban you from using anything they want when off duty. Next time you get your medical done toss a few of their banned drugs on the form and see how they respond.

I was talking about a hypothetical situation where the DOT does allow for pilots to use marijuana products (something that I don't see happening for a very long time). Rickair then said that even if the DOT allows it, a company could prohibit its use. I am saying that they couldn't dictate how you live your life on your days off. They can limit what you say online sure, but that is because they can claim it damages the reputation of the company. That would be like a company saying you can't drink even on your days off.

navigatro
05-06-2018, 05:58 AM
I was talking about a hypothetical situation where the DOT does allow for pilots to use marijuana products (something that I don't see happening for a very long time). Rickair then said that even if the DOT allows it, a company could prohibit its use. I am saying that they couldn't dictate how you live your life on your days off. They can limit what you say online sure, but that is because they can claim it damages the reputation of the company. That would be like a company saying you can't drink even on your days off.

Companies can legally fire you for smoking (tobacco) off the job. (depending on state law and your employment contract) So your premise is incorrect.

USMCFLYR
05-06-2018, 07:49 AM
If you get into trouble with alcohol in the FAA (at least with safety sensitive positions), then abstinence for drinking again is absolutely something the FAA itself will prohibit if you wish to continued to be employed by the agency.

USMCFLYR
05-06-2018, 08:57 AM
If you get into trouble with alcohol in the FAA (at least with safety sensitive positions), then abstinence for drinking again is absolutely something the FAA itself will prohibit if you wish to continued to be employed by the agency.

rickair7777
05-06-2018, 04:22 PM
I was talking about a hypothetical situation where the DOT does allow for pilots to use marijuana products (something that I don't see happening for a very long time). Rickair then said that even if the DOT allows it, a company could prohibit its use. I am saying that they couldn't dictate how you live your life on your days off. They can limit what you say online sure, but that is because they can claim it damages the reputation of the company. That would be like a company saying you can't drink even on your days off.

Where does it say they can't do that? Nowhere.

Most airlines ban you from drinking at arbitrary times, very few default to the law (ie 8 hours). Where does it say that's legal? Nowhere. But it's still legal.

Just because it offends your sensibilities doesn't mean it's actually illegal. I Got Rights!

Few companies ban smoking, and fewer still alcohol use because in most places it would limit their applicant pool, and annoy many potential customers and employees just over the principle of the thing.

An airline which banned MJ on the other hand would not annoy too many potential employees or customers. In fact, probably quite the opposite.

Now with all that said, some countries ban employee drug testing, and I think some US states ban random post-employment drug testing (ie they can test you once at time of hire. But that's just testing. Employers could still legally ban drug use, they just can't test for it (except as required by the Fed, ie DOT).

at6d
05-06-2018, 11:31 PM
Something to think about for those in ďlegalizedĒ statesóthose with medical use cards are not allowed to possess firearms or ammo.

8out
05-07-2018, 02:34 AM
Embarrassing thread involving professional people that the public expects more of.

TimetoClimb
05-07-2018, 05:27 AM
Embarrassing thread involving professional people that the public expects more of.

The 1930s called and they are looking for you.

FLYLOW22
05-07-2018, 06:37 AM
Embarrassing thread involving professional people that the public expects more of.



As would the same regarding grammar demand.

m3113n1a1
05-07-2018, 06:44 AM
Embarrassing thread involving professional people that the public expects more of.

You must be a joy to fly with.

tomgoodman
05-07-2018, 07:31 AM
As would the same regarding grammar demand.

And up with errors would not put. :D

SonicFlyer
05-07-2018, 09:36 AM
Something to think about for those in ďlegalizedĒ statesóthose with medical use cards are not allowed to possess firearms or ammo.The Constitution disagrees

fadec
05-07-2018, 05:48 PM
This is a quality of life issue. ALPA should be securing our right to party when not at work.

Han Solo
05-08-2018, 05:57 AM
This is a quality of life issue. ALPA should be securing our right to party when not at work.

It would be a better use of my dues money than many of their misadventures.

CaptCoolHand
05-08-2018, 08:55 AM
How about the CBD oil? Any idea if that will cause a positive test. Theyíre selling it as a great pain reliever.

My Mom uses CBD for pain relief and she swears by it. She has MS.
Not sure if you'd pop for it, I'm not willing to touch the stuff though.

StartngOvr
05-13-2018, 01:35 PM
I find it quite funny that the last thread I was reading was full of people ranting about how hazardous to your health even one exposure to "wet sock" smell in the cockpit can be (brain damage and all....)

......and over here there's a subset of folks clamoring for an excuse to completely melt their brain toking up every block of days off they get. I mean, really, some of you guys sound desperate.

Let's be realistic. The FAA recently made ingestion of Benedryl within 60 HOURS of going on duty a federal crime. Does anybody really think there is an individual at FAA who is willing to place his/her signature on any rule making allowing use of any THC containing products? Can you imagine the backlash after the first incident or accident investigation in which blood toxicity showed THC? Never gonna happen.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

OOfff
05-13-2018, 02:32 PM
I find it quite funny that the last thread I was reading was full of people ranting about how hazardous to your health even one exposure to "wet sock" smell in the cockpit can be (brain damage and all....)

......and over here there's a subset of folks clamoring for an excuse to completely melt their brain toking up every block of days off they get. I mean, really, some of you guys sound desperate.

Let's be realistic. The FAA recently made ingestion of Benedryl within 60 HOURS of going on duty a federal crime. Does anybody really think there is an individual at FAA who is willing to place his/her signature on any rule making allowing use of any THC containing products? Can you imagine the backlash after the first incident or accident investigation in which blood toxicity showed THC? Never gonna happen.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
I believe that you believe organophosphates and recreational marijuana have the same effect on the body.

Qotsaautopilot
05-13-2018, 02:33 PM
Marijuana is not good for your body in a recreational sense. People drink alcohol off duty which is much worse imo and that’s legal. Never say never. As old voters die things change.

StartngOvr
05-13-2018, 02:48 PM
I believe that you believe organophosphates and recreational marijuana have the same effect on the body.



Permanent, irreversible brain damage and cognitive impairment? Yup.

Now, the effects can differ significantly also. For example, ingestion of pyrolyzed oil (or organophosphates if you like) probably doesn't increase the likelihood that the user will self-administer other chemicals (e.g. heroin) when given an opportunity.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

OOfff
05-13-2018, 02:52 PM
Permanent, irreversible brain damage and cognitive impairment? Yup.

Now, the effects can differ significantly also. For example, ingestion of pyrolyzed oil (or organophosphates if you like) probably doesn't increase the likelihood that the user will self-administer other chemicals (e.g. heroin) when given an opportunity.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
Oh god, reefer madness levels of knowledge are still alive and well.

StartngOvr
05-13-2018, 03:15 PM
Oh god, reefer madness levels of knowledge are still alive and well.



Oh yes! I'm very backward thinking. I'm not intellectually capable like all the enlightened folks who know a few bong hits after work every day can cure everything from arthritis to the Zika virus.....

Maybe we should replace the Exxon Turbo II with cannabis oil in APU gearboxes? Seems like that would solve both problems...Of course we would have to cater extra Cheetos!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

OOfff
05-13-2018, 03:22 PM
Oh yes! I'm very backward thinking. I'm not intellectually capable

I mean, at least you admit it

SonicFlyer
05-13-2018, 03:26 PM
I believe that you believe organophosphates and recreational marijuana have the same effect on the body.

It doesn't matter what you can believe. Where is the proof? :rolleyes:

Qotsaautopilot
05-13-2018, 03:42 PM
Smoking marijuana does not increase the likelihood of a person doing heroine. Getting injured and being prescribed highly addictive legal pain killers does increase the likelihood of a person doing heroine.

OOfff
05-13-2018, 03:43 PM
It doesn't matter what you can believe. Where is the proof? :rolleyes:

The proof that marijuana is not as bad as organophosphate ingestion? Is that what youíre looking for?

StartngOvr
05-13-2018, 04:21 PM
Smoking marijuana does not increase the likelihood of a person doing heroine. Getting injured and being prescribed highly addictive legal pain killers does increase the likelihood of a person doing heroine.


They both do. They are not mutually exclusive.

The point of the HEROIN example was the increased likelihood of substance abuse of any illicit or illegally obtained prescription drugs. Not specifically just heroin.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

StartngOvr
05-13-2018, 04:25 PM
I mean, at least you admit it


Ouch. That hurts.

Hopefully there's a symposium on sarcasm at your next MENSA meeting.

Peace, love and good vibes dude. ☮️



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Qotsaautopilot
05-13-2018, 07:01 PM
They both do. They are not mutually exclusive.

The point of the HEROIN example was the increased likelihood of substance abuse of any illicit or illegally obtained prescription drugs. Not specifically just heroin.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

They both donít

SonicFlyer
05-13-2018, 09:23 PM
The proof that marijuana is not as bad as organophosphate ingestion? Is that what youíre looking for?

Sorry that was meant for use "Starting Over" when they wrote "Permanent, irreversible brain damage and cognitive impairment? Yup."

Glenntilton
05-14-2018, 02:48 AM
How many accidents from pilots using MJ? Or any drug for that matter?

sailingfun
05-14-2018, 06:01 AM
How many accidents from pilots using MJ? Or any drug for that matter?

If you go to the FAA data base there are numerous accidents(hundreds) where it appears cognitive function was the cause and the pilot tested positive for THC.

Qotsaautopilot
05-14-2018, 02:22 PM
If you go to the FAA data base there are numerous accidents(hundreds) where it appears cognitive function was the cause and the pilot tested positive for THC.

Positive for the time of the accident or positive from being stoned a month prior?

24Whiskey
05-14-2018, 02:43 PM
How many accidents from pilots using MJ? Or any drug for that matter?

The Lockhart, Texas balloon crash that killed sixteen people... Not marijuana related but the pilot had a smorgasbord of prescription meds in his system.

sailingfun
05-14-2018, 02:44 PM
Positive for the time of the accident or positive from being stoned a month prior?

1 minute of searching!

https://blogs.mprnews.org/newscut/2016/06/pilot-in-fatal-plane-crash-was-stoned-ntsb-says/

https://www.denverpost.com/2016/09/01/pilots-thc-impairment-contributed-to-2014-durango-plane-crash-that-killed-2-ntsb-finds/

https://www.ntsb.gov/_layouts/ntsb.aviation/brief.aspx?ev_id=20150516X60316&key=1

https://www.adn.com/aviation/article/ntsb-issues-final-report-fathers-fatal-plane-crash-daughters-wedding/2016/03/16/

https://www.news-press.com/story/news/2018/04/21/punta-gorda-pilot-had-used-pot-liquor-before-fatal-crash-ohio/539186002/

OOfff
05-14-2018, 03:30 PM
1 minute of searching!

https://blogs.mprnews.org/newscut/2016/06/pilot-in-fatal-plane-crash-was-stoned-ntsb-says/

https://www.denverpost.com/2016/09/01/pilots-thc-impairment-contributed-to-2014-durango-plane-crash-that-killed-2-ntsb-finds/

https://www.ntsb.gov/_layouts/ntsb.aviation/brief.aspx?ev_id=20150516X60316&key=1

https://www.adn.com/aviation/article/ntsb-issues-final-report-fathers-fatal-plane-crash-daughters-wedding/2016/03/16/

https://www.news-press.com/story/news/2018/04/21/punta-gorda-pilot-had-used-pot-liquor-before-fatal-crash-ohio/539186002/

What does any of this matter? People can misuse all kinds of substances. That doesnít mean we should prohibit people from doing (responsibly) what they want on their off days. We trust people with alcohol already, no reason not to trust people with marijuana.

sailingfun
05-14-2018, 03:55 PM
What does any of this matter? People can misuse all kinds of substances. That doesnít mean we should prohibit people from doing (responsibly) what they want on their off days. We trust people with alcohol already, no reason not to trust people with marijuana.

You can quickly and easily test for alcohol. There is no real way to test for THC with a immediate result. That alone is good enough for me.

galaxy flyer
05-14-2018, 04:00 PM
Positive for the time of the accident or positive from being stoned a month prior?

That they canít test which is why legalization in safety-critical industries is unlikely. Ricky Gates was toking on MJ when he drove past the Gunpowder Interlock and collided with an Amtrak train killing 14. Congress passed drug and alcohol testing and maintains marijuana is an illegal, controlled substance at the Federal level. Do you really think this will change?


GF

Qotsaautopilot
05-14-2018, 06:06 PM
That they canít test which is why legalization in safety-critical industries is unlikely. Ricky Gates was toking on MJ when he drove past the Gunpowder Interlock and collided with an Amtrak train killing 14. Congress passed drug and alcohol testing and maintains marijuana is an illegal, controlled substance at the Federal level. Do you really think this will change?


GF

I was making a point. Too subtle I guess.

Big E 757
05-14-2018, 06:45 PM
That they canít test which is why legalization in safety-critical industries is unlikely. Ricky Gates was toking on MJ when he drove past the Gunpowder Interlock and collided with an Amtrak train killing 14. Congress passed drug and alcohol testing and maintains marijuana is an illegal, controlled substance at the Federal level. Do you really think this will change?


GF

No. This will never change. Even if all 50 states make it as easy to buy weed as it is to buy beer or wine, we will still be tested for it, and if it is present in the system, you are done.

The problem with THC is how long it stays in your system. They wonít ever remove THC from the panel of drugs tested for. I canít believe that this is the first year that they test for the oxy and hydro codone and morphone. All those synthetic opioids that are supposedly causing the heroin epidemic havenít been tested for until this year. That surprised me.

I do believe that there are a lot of medicinal benefits that will be discovered from marijuana, and I own two cannibinoid drug stocks in my 401K. I hope they cure cancer with it. In my opinion, itís much less harmful than alcohol, but it will always be off limits for me until I retire...or get sick in the years to come if a medical discovery in THC/cannibinoids can cure me.

Glenntilton
05-14-2018, 06:57 PM
1 minute of searching!

https://blogs.mprnews.org/newscut/2016/06/pilot-in-fatal-plane-crash-was-stoned-ntsb-says/

https://www.denverpost.com/2016/09/01/pilots-thc-impairment-contributed-to-2014-durango-plane-crash-that-killed-2-ntsb-finds/

https://www.ntsb.gov/_layouts/ntsb.aviation/brief.aspx?ev_id=20150516X60316&key=1

https://www.adn.com/aviation/article/ntsb-issues-final-report-fathers-fatal-plane-crash-daughters-wedding/2016/03/16/

https://www.news-press.com/story/news/2018/04/21/punta-gorda-pilot-had-used-pot-liquor-before-fatal-crash-ohio/539186002/

Some there were drinking also. But none were airline accidents.

Westernflight
05-16-2018, 06:56 AM
The problem with THC is how long it stays in your system. They wonít ever remove THC from the panel of drugs tested for.


Actually itís a big misconception that the phychoactive component THC is directly tested for, itís not. All urine based drug tests look for a specific metabolite of THC and that is used as the basis of proving consumption. This metabolite hangs around in your body far longer than the actual intoxicating substance, however it does not hang around in everyoneís body for an equal (or near to) amount of time in the way alcohol, or any substance thatís tested for does. Some people can smoke a joint and pass a drug test in less than 2 days while others would fail for over a week. This is flat out discrimination in effect and ďreffer madnessĒ thought processes have allowed these tests to remain the standard. Additionally there are plenty of medical studies that show the time period in which a person is impaired is far shorter than that of Benadryl, which is legal. Peopleís irrational thoughts towards this substance continue to allow it to be stigmatized.

Imagine if you and your buddy drank three beers at the bar, you blow zeros 8 hours later yet he somehow continues to blow .05 for the next week. We wouldnít accept this in alcohol testing, so why is this considered acceptable with regards to marijuana?

Bottom line is one could easily make the point these testing procedures actually push pilots towards more hazardous recreational drugs in their down time, such as cocaine. A couple bumps on Friday night and youíre peeing clean on Monday. Itís not like that drug ever caused any problems for pilots.

rickair7777
05-16-2018, 07:18 AM
Imagine if you and your buddy drank three beers at the bar, you blow zeros 8 hours later yet he somehow continues to blow .05 for the next week. We wouldnít accept this in alcohol testing, so why is this considered acceptable with regards to marijuana?


Because the question being addressed WRT to cannabis is "did he consume any recently?". Recently being any time during his employment in 121 (military, law enforcement, etc).



The question being addressed WRT to alcohol is "Does he meet the threshold for impairment right now?"






Bottom line is one could easily make the point these testing procedures actually push pilots towards more hazardous recreational drugs in their down time, such as cocaine. A couple bumps on Friday night and youíre peeing clean on Monday. Itís not like that drug ever caused any problems for pilots.


Maybe. But needs more research, I think there are concerns about long-term cognitive impairment... I have my suspicions based on how some of my rocker/stoner buddies from HS turned out.



But I don't get people who complain when they went down the aviation road with eyes wide open. Do you really need a joint that bad? Would I smoke if I could? Sure, maybe on Saturday night. But I'm not going to change careers to do it :confused:

sailingfun
05-16-2018, 07:27 AM
Actually itís a big misconception that the phychoactive component THC is directly tested for, itís not. All urine based drug tests look for a specific metabolite of THC and that is used as the basis of proving consumption. This metabolite hangs around in your body far longer than the actual intoxicating substance, however it does not hang around in everyoneís body for an equal (or near to) amount of time in the way alcohol, or any substance thatís tested for does. Some people can smoke a joint and pass a drug test in less than 2 days while others would fail for over a week. This is flat out discrimination in effect and ďreffer madnessĒ thought processes have allowed these tests to remain the standard. Additionally there are plenty of medical studies that show the time period in which a person is impaired is far shorter than that of Benadryl, which is legal. Peopleís irrational thoughts towards this substance continue to allow it to be stigmatized.

Imagine if you and your buddy drank three beers at the bar, you blow zeros 8 hours later yet he somehow continues to blow .05 for the next week. We wouldnít accept this in alcohol testing, so why is this considered acceptable with regards to marijuana?

Bottom line is one could easily make the point these testing procedures actually push pilots towards more hazardous recreational drugs in their down time, such as cocaine. A couple bumps on Friday night and youíre peeing clean on Monday. Itís not like that drug ever caused any problems for pilots.

Since when is Benadryl legal to fly with?

Westernflight
05-16-2018, 07:45 AM
Since when is Benadryl legal to fly with?

Not legal to fly with, but legal to consume and the FAA has a clearly established timetable for return. My previous post was in regards to if/when marijuana becomes legal to consume in the US. To my knowledge there are no substances that arenít a controlled substance that one can lose their job over. If weed is legalized on a federal level, it would seem they would need to treat it no differently than Benadryl or Alcohol and establish a safe time period for return. Otherwise youíre descriminating.

I donít need to smoke or would likely even do so if it was legalized federally, but when people can lose their jobs due to extremely antiquated testing procedures I think it needs to be addressed. After all, alcohol has been absolutely proven to cause long term mental, cognitive, and general health issues, yet itís consumption is perfectly legal, almost encouraged amongst flight crew. 8 hours bottle to throttle has a nice ring to it, makes me wanna grab a beer at the end of a long day! Ultimately what we as professionals need to address is most arguments against marijuana donít hold any weight once long standing biases are dropped. Times change. Probably wasnít that long ago no one could imagine a flight deck without cigarettes.

SonicFlyer
05-16-2018, 07:46 AM
Maybe. But needs more research, I think there are concerns about long-term cognitive impairment... I have my suspicions based on how some of my rocker/stoner buddies from HS turned out.

I know several alcoholics in the same situation. Lifelong abuse of any substance will cause cognitive decline (except for maybe caffeine? lol)

Westernflight
05-16-2018, 07:59 AM
The question being addressed WRT to alcohol is "Does he meet the threshold for impairment right now?"



My original point still stands, if two individuals consume the same amount of alcohol and one individual takes 5 days to get below the legal threshold for impairment and the other 8 hours would the public continue to accept this test as feasible or would the test be thrown out and another one established. After all, if we were just testing for a random metabolite associated with alcohol, Iím sure weíd run into similar situations. Itís why some people have hangovers when others donít.

Itís been easy to ignore this issue with marijuana because any and all consumption is illegal on a federal level. Once that is no longer the case new standards for testing will have to be established.

rickair7777
05-16-2018, 09:59 AM
Itís been easy to ignore this issue with marijuana because any and all consumption is illegal on a federal level. Once that is no longer the case new standards for testing will have to be established.

Yes, and they'll also have to decide whether to ban all consumption for safety-sensitive workers.

Westernflight
05-16-2018, 10:07 AM
Yes, and they'll also have to decide whether to ban all consumption for safety-sensitive workers.

I agree, but to continue to play devils advocate, are there any substances out there, federally legal for adult consumption without a prescription that are 100% banned for for safety sensitive workers? Genuine question, although Iím not aware of any. Would set a new precedent.

As mentioned before Benadryl is banned for use while flying but youíre allowed to consume it so long as you abide by the FAAs waiting period.

rickair7777
05-16-2018, 11:45 AM
I agree, but to continue to play devils advocate, are there any substances out there, federally legal for adult consumption without a prescription that are 100% banned for for safety sensitive workers? Genuine question, although Iím not aware of any. Would set a new precedent.

The only federally legal mind-altering substance which I'm aware of is alcohol... and even that was illegal at one point.

You could stretch it and include caffeine and nicotine but those are mild stimulants and not considered to be impairing in any way. Lack of either might be impairing. Coffee is a very real no-go item for me for redeyes and very early shows.

sailingfun
05-17-2018, 05:12 AM
I agree, but to continue to play devils advocate, are there any substances out there, federally legal for adult consumption without a prescription that are 100% banned for for safety sensitive workers? Genuine question, although Iím not aware of any. Would set a new precedent.

As mentioned before Benadryl is banned for use while flying but youíre allowed to consume it so long as you abide by the FAAs waiting period.

The waiting period for benadryl is 60 hours. Never knew a stoner in college who went more then a day without getting high.

Big E 757
05-17-2018, 05:48 AM
The only federally legal mind-altering substance which I'm aware of is alcohol... and even that was illegal at one point.

You could stretch it and include caffeine and nicotine but those are mild stimulants and not considered to be impairing in any way. Lack of either might be impairing. Coffee is a very real no-go item for me for redeyes and very early shows.

As Iím reading this thread, there is a pop up add on my iPad selling cultivation rooms for growing cannibis. Itís scary how good google is getting at targeting adds to what content you read online.

SonicFlyer
05-17-2018, 07:52 AM
The waiting period for benadryl is 60 hours. Can you cite where you found this? I am not trying to second guess you, I am genuinally curious.

galaxy flyer
05-17-2018, 08:05 AM
Google is your friend (or enemy). Check out the FAA on legal OTC drug use.

https://www.faa.gov/news/safety_briefing/2016/media/SE_Topic_16-09.pdf

GF

Ronaldo
05-18-2018, 12:10 AM
I agree with westernflight, metabolites are the issue. The second issue is rapid testing. The breathalyzer is not a final diagnostic tool in many states/countries, only blood tests (GC/MS). I would refuse a breathalyzer anytime in-lieu of a blood test if in a location where itís allowed. Despite what you might think, this is legal in many states (not sure how DOT treats state officials administering breathalyzer for federal transportation), and not considered a refusal. There are many reasons a breathalyzer is flawed (hydration, lung volume, calibration, ketosis (acetone)), 1960 average lung volumes, etc.

Twenty years ago, my forensic chemistry teacher told us to always refuse and opt for blood tests. Now after 300+ cases, my defense attorney friend agrees. HOWEVER. this is not legal advice!!!

The problem with THC is there arenít many funded studies to determine impairment levels. Thereís a forensic scientist running around the halls of state legislature in CO claiming 0 ng/ml is a sound threshold. But thatís likely because she has a B.S in Chemistry from printurdegree.com and has some religious objection to it. I hate to disparage but only a fool would advocate for ď0Ē. It shows a complete lack of scientific basis or reasoning.

Bottom line, DOT thresholds and DOD thresholds for THC/metabolites are around 15ng/ml but you can be convicted of impairment by local authorities at 3ng or less. Itíll be years before there is a consensus to convince the FAA. Itís been legal for decades in other ICAO countries, what are their standards? I donít know.

Rapid field tests/roadside tests = Maury Povich of science. If it comes back that I have fathered 3 children with Olivia Wilde, I wouldnít go buying diapers just yet.

Han Solo
05-18-2018, 03:46 AM
I agree, but to continue to play devils advocate, are there any substances out there, federally legal for adult consumption without a prescription that are 100% banned for for safety sensitive workers? Genuine question, although Iím not aware of any. Would set a new precedent.

As mentioned before Benadryl is banned for use while flying but youíre allowed to consume it so long as you abide by the FAAs waiting period.

I see where you're going with this, but your analogy is a bit off. Marijuana is currently illegal and carries a significant social stigma, I can't think of a parallel substance. Maybe alcohol after prohibition, but alcohol wasn't illegal for all that long and there was no FAA when prohibition was repealed. To devil's advocate your devil's advocate, what substance has been illegal for 80+ years then been made legal, and then been approved for use by the FAA?

Remember, this is the organization that thinks my cell phone out of airplane mode is going to bring down an airliner. My offer stands, I bet 1 bag of cool ranch doritos that my 1st joint will be the day I turn 65 years old (or whatever the retirement age is when I finally get there) and not a day before (or after).

Qotsaautopilot
05-18-2018, 05:30 AM
I see where you're going with this, but your analogy is a bit off. Marijuana is currently illegal and carries a significant social stigma, I can't think of a parallel substance. Maybe alcohol after prohibition, but alcohol wasn't illegal for all that long and there was no FAA when prohibition was repealed. To devil's advocate your devil's advocate, what substance has been illegal for 80+ years then been made legal, and then been approved for use by the FAA?

Remember, this is the organization that thinks my cell phone out of airplane mode is going to bring down an airliner. My offer stands, I bet 1 bag of cool ranch doritos that my 1st joint will be the day I turn 65 years old (or whatever the retirement age is when I finally get there) and not a day before (or after).

The social stigma only exists for citizens over the age of 70. They also happen to be the most reliable voters. There are less of them everyday.

Qotsaautopilot
05-18-2018, 05:35 AM
I agree with westernflight, metabolites are the issue. The second issue is rapid testing. The breathalyzer is not a final diagnostic tool in many states/countries, only blood tests (GC/MS). I would refuse a breathalyzer anytime in-lieu of a blood test if in a location where itís allowed. Despite what you might think, this is legal in many states (not sure how DOT treats state officials administering breathalyzer for federal transportation), and not considered a refusal. There are many reasons a breathalyzer is flawed (hydration, lung volume, calibration, ketosis (acetone)), 1960 average lung volumes, etc.

Twenty years ago, my forensic chemistry teacher told us to always refuse and opt for blood tests. Now after 300+ cases, my defense attorney friend agrees. HOWEVER. this is not legal advice!!!

The problem with THC is there arenít many funded studies to determine impairment levels. Thereís a forensic scientist running around the halls of state legislature in CO claiming 0 ng/ml is a sound threshold. But thatís likely because she has a B.S in Chemistry from printurdegree.com and has some religious objection to it. I hate to disparage but only a fool would advocate for ď0Ē. It shows a complete lack of scientific basis or reasoning.

Bottom line, DOT thresholds and DOD thresholds for THC/metabolites are around 15ng/ml but you can be convicted of impairment by local authorities at 3ng or less. Itíll be years before there is a consensus to convince the FAA. Itís been legal for decades in other ICAO countries, what are their standards? I donít know.

Rapid field tests/roadside tests = Maury Povich of science. If it comes back that I have fathered 3 children with Olivia Wilde, I wouldnít go buying diapers just yet.

When it comes to a roadside breathe test for DUI Iíd say yes your chances are better if you refuse in favor of a blood test.

However, in the eyes of the FAA in terms of your medical certificate I think they classify a refusal the same as a positive breathe test. Just throwing that out there.

Btw getting a dui has always been extremely poor judgement but these days with the availability of ride sharing apps itís just plain stupid.

Westernflight
05-18-2018, 05:56 AM
I see where you're going with this, but your analogy is a bit off. Marijuana is currently illegal and carries a significant social stigma, I can't think of a parallel substance. Maybe alcohol after prohibition, but alcohol wasn't illegal for all that long and there was no FAA when prohibition was repealed. To devil's advocate your devil's advocate, what substance has been illegal for 80+ years then been made legal, and then been approved for use by the FAA?

Remember, this is the organization that thinks my cell phone out of airplane mode is going to bring down an airliner. My offer stands, I bet 1 bag of cool ranch doritos that my 1st joint will be the day I turn 65 years old (or whatever the retirement age is when I finally get there) and not a day before (or after).

I agree with your sentiment, but isnít the whole point of this thread the ďwhat ifĒ it was federally legalized? My point is simply if that happens there is no way to ignore that anything that is legal for adult consumption, the FAA has a stance on how long a pilot must wait before operating, but no outright bans. Thereís no precedent for such a thing and it will be interesting to see how itís argued out by the lawyers. Additionally another problem is THC isnít currently being tested for. Only itís metabolites. New tests need to be developed. Iím sure someone out there has had the same thought and is working on it. Patenting a new standard could be very lucrative.

As stated before, if two people consumed the same amount of alcohol and one person took 8 hours to be under the limit but the other took 5 days, would we accept that as a valid testing method? Why is there only one substance out there that we accept a test of this nature? If you look way back to the reasons it was originally outlawed I think you might find the answer.

rickair7777
05-18-2018, 06:23 AM
As stated before, if two people consumed the same amount of alcohol and one person took 8 hours to be under the limit but the other took 5 days, would we accept that as a valid testing method? Why is there only one substance out there that we accept a test of this nature? If you look way back to the reasons it was originally outlawed I think you might find the answer.


Because it wasn't legal at all anywhere in the US a couple years ago, so the test only needed to determine if you'd been using it period.

IF it gets federally legalized, and IF the DOT (and DOD, and DOJ, etc) decide that it's OK to use, then they'll have to figure out how much you can smoke, how long ago, and develop a test for that specifically.

Don't hold your breath (pun intended), the feds will not be falling all over themselves to ensure the rights of airline pilots, soldiers, and cops to blaze up. That will take an act of congress.

AirBear
06-20-2018, 01:20 PM
Well Canada has just legalized Marijuana in the entire country. It'll be interesting to see if Canadian Pilots are allowed to use it. Should be the same rules as alcohol but if there's no test that can determine recent use I can see where the Canadian version of the FAA wouldn't allow it.

Bozo the pilot
06-20-2018, 04:52 PM
Well Canada has just legalized Marijuana in the entire country. It'll be interesting to see if Canadian Pilots are allowed to use it. Should be the same rules as alcohol but if there's no test that can determine recent use I can see where the Canadian version of the FAA wouldn't allow it.
It will never be okay for pilots to be using Mj. The public can accept the boozehound mentality among us, but the stigma attached to pot is too strong.
Just wait till you retire if you must.

METO Guido
06-21-2018, 05:21 AM
A study published at Columbia University determined alcohol was a contributing factor in 40% of fatal traffic accidents in the 1999-2010. Marijuana, 12% over the same period. Altogether, a driver's risk being involved in a traffic fatality rises 24 times when using both. Both are presumably even riskier as applied to aircraft operations. Anyone who's smoked understands time/distance relationships are rearranged under the influence, which can last a while. Until the testing gets a lot more definitive, wouldn't look for a change in policy anytime soon.

trip
06-21-2018, 07:25 AM
Don't hold your breath (pun intended), the feds will not be falling all over themselves to ensure the rights of airline pilots, soldiers, and cops to blaze up. That will take an act of congress.

Most cops only get pre-employment and post accident testing. Crazy right?

Gooselives
06-28-2018, 05:04 PM
Well Canada has just legalized Marijuana in the entire country. It'll be interesting to see if Canadian Pilots are allowed to use it. Should be the same rules as alcohol but if there's no test that can determine recent use I can see where the Canadian version of the FAA wouldn't allow it.

Canada airlines do not have random drug tests fyi

rickair7777
06-28-2018, 05:29 PM
Canada airlines do not have random drug tests fyi

That probably doesn't mean it's legal for pilots to use, it just means you won't get caught until you have an accident, or your use shows up on social media, or the angry ex dimes you out.

NeverHome
07-01-2018, 08:57 AM
3770

May become an issue?

Hetman
07-01-2018, 01:04 PM
When it comes to a roadside breathe test for DUI I’d say yes your chances are better if you refuse in favor of a blood test. FWIW, and this may some day apply to THC, the "roadside" breath test is not admissible as evidence. It is a way for the officer to establish probable cause for an arrest. You can refuse it under the 5th Amendment.

The "official" breath test, or blood test if you so choose, the implied consent test, is administered at the station/clinic only following arrest. You can refuse that, too. Then, and only then, do the ramifications come in to play.

The "dancing bear" routine is also used to establish probable cause and can also be refused. Video of your performance is admissible.

You are completely within your rights, and without jeopardy, for declining to incriminate yourself by the side of the road. Despite what they may tell you, your refusal to assist them in building a case against you is not considered evidence and is not an admission of guilt.

If they can establish probable cause and arrest you even without your kind assistance, that is a different story.

And yeah: Uber is the definitive answer.

Frankie Avalon
07-01-2018, 05:31 PM
A study published at Columbia University determined alcohol was a contributing factor in 40% of fatal traffic accidents in the 1999-2010. Marijuana, 12% over the same period. Altogether, a driver's risk being involved in a traffic fatality rises 24 times when using both. Both are presumably even riskier as applied to aircraft operations. Anyone who's smoked understands time/distance relationships are rearranged under the influence, which can last a while. Until the testing gets a lot more definitive, wouldn't look for a change in policy anytime soon.

Ok but here again, operating while under the influence is being conflated with using at all. I don't think anybody is campaigning for permission to drive/fly stoned.

METO Guido
07-02-2018, 05:38 AM
Ok but here again, operating while under the influence is being conflated with using at all. I don't think anybody is campaigning for permission to drive/fly stoned.
I agree with you.

The hurdle remains testing. THC testing is complex and there is not yet a reliable standard for DUI prosecution. In CA for example, they rely on officer field sobriety training, swabs and a blood sample threshold of 5 nanograms per milliliter. But tough to get convictions when the science has so many holes. Unlike Ethanol, THC dissolves in fat not water and can linger at high levels in regular users. As legalized states develop improved methods for determining who's impaired and who's not, the door may crack open for a federal standard. Possibly extending to DOT safety sensitive workers at some point.

rickair7777
07-02-2018, 06:27 AM
FWIW, and this may some day apply to THC, the "roadside" breath test is not admissible as evidence. It is a way for the officer to establish probable cause for an arrest. You can refuse it under the 5th Amendment.

The "official" breath test, or blood test if you so choose, the implied consent test, is administered at the station/clinic only following arrest. You can refuse that, too. Then, and only then, do the ramifications come in to play.

The "dancing bear" routine is also used to establish probable cause and can also be refused. Video of your performance is admissible.

You are completely within your rights, and without jeopardy, for declining to incriminate yourself by the side of the road. Despite what they may tell you, your refusal to assist them in building a case against you is not considered evidence and is not an admission of guilt.

If they can establish probable cause and arrest you even without your kind assistance, that is a different story.

And yeah: Uber is the definitive answer.

Careful, all of those legal niceties apply to standard of evidence which can used to CONVICT you.

If the FAA thinks you refused, that counts as pretty much the same as a DUI arrest, but they might make assumptions about your BAC (ie assume worst case).

Hetman
07-02-2018, 12:33 PM
True-ish.

Once arrested, the FAA genie is out of the bottle. No conviction required. Actual conviction only makes it worse.

The roadside blow test is for probable cause only and has no evidentiary value. If you are swerving, stumbilng, slurring, reeking etc., they will have probable cause without that test.

The dancing bear test is for evidence as well as probable cause. In truth, if you are asked to perform that, the decision to arrest has probably already been made; the officer is just trying to solidify his case.

If arrested, refusing the official BAC test will likely do more harm than good. Plus, they can get a search warrant for a blood draw, so you have all the refusal issues compounding the fact that they get it anyway.

Don't drink (or toke) and drive.

BMEP100
07-03-2018, 06:06 AM
Right. And don't eat anything offered you by a passenger or FA, like cookies or candy. There is someone out there that thinks it would be cool to "get the pilots high" on their flight.

Marijuana candy that looks like all other candy is becoming such a problem, states are considering laws about their form and appearance. A small child died recently after overdosing on mj.

OOfff
07-03-2018, 08:10 AM
. A small child died recently after overdosing on mj.

This didnít happen


#reefermadness

Qotsaautopilot
07-03-2018, 09:16 PM
Died from OD on marijuana? Must be the first ever

m3113n1a1
07-03-2018, 10:02 PM
Died from OD on marijuana? Must be the first ever

Turned him gay too!

Airway
07-04-2018, 06:12 AM
Lol



.

A Squared
07-04-2018, 08:16 AM
This didnít happen


#reefermadness


There was an incident in Colorado in which a 11 month old child died of cardiac arrest and had "High concentrations of marijuana in his blood." (whatever that means) some doctors have claimed that the marijuana was the cause of the cardiac arrest. Other doctors have said that it's not certain that the marijuana did cause the death, and that the pot-haters should probably stop doing their victory dance. Even if we assume that this death did result solely from marijuana ingestion, it's worth noting that this would be the *only* documented case of a death from marijuana overdose, ever. Meanwhile, 30-40 people a year die in the US from salicylate (aspirin) poisoning.

badflaps
07-04-2018, 11:00 AM
Not to mention undercooked small chunks of Panda.

Aero1900
07-04-2018, 01:56 PM
Not to mention undercooked small chunks of Panda.

Don't talk sh*t about Panda Express! I've been eating there regularly for 10 years. Never once gotten sick.

ReserveCA
07-04-2018, 03:53 PM
Don't talk sh*t about Panda Express! I've been eating there regularly for 10 years. Never once gotten sick.

I have.....twice in 3 yrs, don't go there anymore

GogglesPisano
07-04-2018, 03:54 PM
Panda Express = Chinese McDonalds. Stay away.

Excargodog
07-04-2018, 03:55 PM
Don't talk sh*t about Panda Express! I've been eating there regularly for 10 years. Never once gotten sick.

If it were merely TALKING sh*t after eating at Panda EXPRESS, it would be different. But it is EXPRESSING all that sh*t for a couple hours after eating there. Thank goodness I wasn't jumpseating on a CR 200 and monopolizing the LONE blue room for 3-4 hundred miles at a s*itting.

:(

OOfff
07-04-2018, 04:24 PM
There was an incident in Colorado in which a 11 month old child died of cardiac arrest and had "High concentrations of marijuana in his blood." (whatever that means) some doctors have claimed that the marijuana was the cause of the cardiac arrest. Other doctors have said that it's not certain that the marijuana did cause the death, and that the pot-haters should probably stop doing their victory dance. Even if we assume that this death did result solely from marijuana ingestion, it's worth noting that this would be the *only* documented case of a death from marijuana overdose, ever. Meanwhile, 30-40 people a year die in the US from salicylate (aspirin) poisoning.

I prefer to believe that nefarious drug dealers are giving kids thousands of dollars of edibles in hopes they die

A Squared
07-04-2018, 05:07 PM
I prefer to believe that nefarious drug dealers are giving kids thousands of dollars of edibles in hopes they die


Well, whatever works for you. Far be it from me to stand in your way. ;)

BMEP100
07-04-2018, 07:14 PM
https://www.thecannabist.co/2017/11/17/baby-marijuana-death-heart-condition-colorado-update/92644/


https://www.wate.com/news/2-children-hospitalized-after-eating-marijuana-laced-gummies-florida-woman-arrested/834569952


It would be the first.. Even if there is no conclusive medical evidence that marijuana in the system of an infant contributed to his death, unconiousness in a child is not a small thing. I'm not eating any candy offered to me from someone else...particularly out of Denver.

Puts a whole new spin on Rocky Mountain High.

A Squared
07-04-2018, 11:10 PM
https://www.thecannabist.co/2017/11/17/baby-marijuana-death-heart-condition-colorado-update/92644/


https://www.wate.com/news/2-children-hospitalized-after-eating-marijuana-laced-gummies-florida-woman-arrested/834569952


It would be the first.. Even if there is no conclusive medical evidence that marijuana in the system of an infant contributed to his death, unconiousness in a child is not a small thing. I'm not eating any candy offered to me from someone else...particularly out of Denver.

Puts a whole new spin on Rocky Mountain High.


Shaking my head at the thought process that would lead someone to believe that it's a good idea to put drugs in something which would call out to a small child; "Eat me" ... like gummy bears.

OOfff
07-05-2018, 08:02 AM
Shaking my head at the thought process that would lead someone to believe that it's a good idea to put drugs in something which would call out to a small child; "Eat me" ... like gummy bears.

Itís almosy as if adults sometimes eat candy or cookies or other foods

detpilot
07-06-2018, 08:11 PM
There is some expert level sarcasm and shade being thrown in this thread.... I approve!

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G891A using Tapatalk

A Squared
07-06-2018, 11:13 PM
Itís almosy as if adults sometimes eat candy or cookies or other foods


Ummm, yeah... I have no objection to legalized marijuana, but anyone with an IQ above room temperature can see that toddlers ingesting cannabis is probably something best avoided, and putting harmful (arguably lethal) substances in candies is going to have a very predictable outcome.

OOfff
07-07-2018, 05:27 AM
Ummm, yeah... I have no objection to legalized marijuana, but anyone with an IQ above room temperature can see that toddlers ingesting cannabis is probably something best avoided, and putting harmful (arguably lethal) substances in candies is going to have a very predictable outcome.
ďArguably lethalĒ


Lol. Reefer madness strikes again.

m3113n1a1
07-07-2018, 07:26 AM
ďArguably lethalĒ


Lol. Reefer madness strikes again.

Lolol, it's the same thing as "Not all scientists agree on climate change. It's debatable."

deadstick35
07-07-2018, 07:42 AM
From what I hear, pot engineering is a thing and they can grow this stuff with higher THC concentrations. Does this change the idea that you wonít test positive from second-hand exposure? After this vacation, Iím probably not going to visit any more places where this crap is legal.

A Squared
07-07-2018, 07:48 AM
Please provide a citation for ďarguably lethal.Ē

And why not wait until this is an actual problem instead of getting up in arms about an edible poisoning epidemic that doesnít exist


The reference for "arguably lethal" is the previously linked possible poisoning death in Colorado. While there is some dispute in the medical community that the death was solely due to the cannabis ingestion, there are at least some who believe it was, and not without some fairly strong evidence. That's pretty much the textbook definition of "arguably". Regardless, only a fool would argue that small children ingesting cannabis would be completely harmless. See the previously linked article about children hospitalized due to accidental cannabis poisoning. As I said, I'm in favor of cannabis legalization. I don't think cannabis is evil, or that people who use it are evil. My opinion is not coming from a position of anti-pot hysteria. But it's quite possible to be in favor of adults having the freedom to partake in cannabis, and at the same time think that it's a really bad idea to package a substance that is harmful to small children, in a form that is attractive to small children to eat.



You can keep on yelling "REEFER MADNESS" if you like, but that just underscores the fact that you don't have an intelligent response.

Qotsaautopilot
07-07-2018, 07:58 AM
Deadstick,

Good luck with that. Do you plan to stop flying domestically? As the greatest generation dies off and the voting populace becomes boomers, gen X, and mellineals the pot laws will loosen. I think the only people in my family that think pot should be illegal are my grandparents and none of us indulge currently.

My friend did tell me pot today is much more potent than even ten years ago. He also said pot smokers today are so pretentious. Kind of like a hipster coffee house crowd. He said it’s all about e-sig vaping oils and edibles. Nobody just rolls one the good ole fashion way anymore, at least on his circles

OOfff
07-07-2018, 11:22 AM
The reference for "arguably lethal" is the previously linked possible poisoning death in Colorado. While there is some dispute in the medical community that the death was solely due to the cannabis ingestion, there are at least some who believe it was, and not without some fairly strong evidence. That's pretty much the textbook definition of "arguably". Regardless, only a fool would argue that small children ingesting cannabis would be completely harmless. See the previously linked article about children hospitalized due to accidental cannabis poisoning. As I said, I'm in favor of cannabis legalization. I don't think cannabis is evil, or that people who use it are evil. My opinion is not coming from a position of anti-pot hysteria. But it's quite possible to be in favor of adults having the freedom to partake in cannabis, and at the same time think that it's a really bad idea to package a substance that is harmful to small children, in a form that is attractive to small children to eat.



You can keep on yelling "REEFER MADNESS" if you like, but that just underscores the fact that you don't have an intelligent response.

Neither of us have read the coronerís report, and Iím willing to bet the only authorities who have said anything about cannabia poisoning are cops with no medical background. Feel free to correct me on that.


Also, did you hear that pharmaceutical companies are now packaging drugs with child friendly sweet flavors? One even has an LD50 orders of magnitude lower than cannabis! Get that dangerous dimetapp off the shelves!

Qotsaautopilot
07-07-2018, 11:52 AM
Neither of us have read the coronerís report, and Iím willing to bet the only authorities who have said anything about cannabia poisoning are cops with no medical background. Feel free to correct me on that.


Also, did you hear that pharmaceutical companies are now packaging drugs with child friendly sweet flavors? One even has an LD50 orders of magnitude lower than cannabis! Get that dangerous dimetapp off the shelves!

Cough medicine isnít packaged to look like candy and also has a locking cap. Try not to sound as crazy as the anti pot folks. The regulation of marketing and packaging of edibles needs some major changes.

OOfff
07-07-2018, 11:56 AM
Cough medicine isnít packaged to look like candy and also has a locking cap. Try not to sound as crazy as the anti pot folks. The regulation of marketing and packaging of edibles needs some major changes.

So, your big issue is that edibles have easy open packaging?

It needs no changes. Just keep the (non-lethal) substance away from your kids the same way you do with thousands of other products

A Squared
07-07-2018, 12:11 PM
I’m willing to bet the only authorities who have said anything about cannabia poisoning are cops with no medical background. Feel free to correct me on that.




Well, you'd lose that bet. If you had done even the most superficial reading on the subject, instead of your your knee-jerk response of plugging your ears and yelling " DIDN"T HAPPEN!!!! REEFER MADNESS!!!! "; you would have seen that yes, actual doctors, with medical background, who by the way, specialize in toxicity, do in fact say that there is significant evidence to suggest that the death was related to the cannabis. It is not proven, (nor do the doctors *claim* it is proven) but then neither has it been conclusively refuted and no alternate cause of the myocarditis has been identified.





But, I think you've already demonstrated pretty clearly that you're not interested in reality.

rickair7777
07-07-2018, 01:41 PM
Reefer heads get pretty triggered at any suggestion that cannabis is anything other than a benign useful material that makes the world a better place... the more, the better. Juries still out on that, but I imagine there will be plenty of research soon enough.

Almost anything can be toxic in the right quantities, and many things need to be kept away from kids.

deadstick35
07-07-2018, 06:02 PM
Deadstick,

Good luck with that. Do you plan to stop flying domestically? As the greatest generation dies off and the voting populace becomes boomers, gen X, and mellineals the pot laws will loosen. I think the only people in my family that think pot should be illegal are my grandparents and none of us indulge currently.

My friend did tell me pot today is much more potent than even ten years ago. He also said pot smokers today are so pretentious. Kind of like a hipster coffee house crowd. He said itís all about e-sig vaping oils and edibles. Nobody just rolls one the good ole fashion way anymore, at least on his circles


If a pilot can test positive in this scenario and lose a career, thereís something wrong. Period. I just turned a corner to walk down some stairs and walked into a could of the crap. 3 guys sitting there having a grand olí time. :mad:

OOfff
07-07-2018, 07:25 PM
Reefer heads get pretty triggered at any suggestion that cannabis is anything other than a benign useful material that makes the world a better place... the more, the better. Juries still out on that, but I imagine there will be plenty of research soon enough.

Almost anything can be toxic in the right quantities, and many things need to be kept away from kids.

Three things:

1) I never said we shouldnít keep edibles and cannabis away from children.

2) Iím far from a ďreefer head,Ē having never used it in my life.

3) is it appropriate for a moderator of this forum to use insults on the members?

OOfff
07-07-2018, 07:26 PM
Well, you'd lose that bet. If you had done even the most superficial reading on the subject, instead of your your knee-jerk response of plugging your ears and yelling " DIDN"T HAPPEN!!!! REEFER MADNESS!!!! "; you would have seen that yes, actual doctors, with medical background, who by the way, specialize in toxicity, do in fact say that there is significant evidence to suggest that the death was related to the cannabis. It is not proven, (nor do the doctors *claim* it is proven) but then neither has it been conclusively refuted and no alternate cause of the myocarditis has been identified.





But, I think you've already demonstrated pretty clearly that you're not interested in reality.

Eh, I stand corrected on the medical professionals (taking your word for it). I guess we will wait to see if there are any other links with myocarditis that suddenly pop up.

I still donít think we need to stop making edibles.

Qotsaautopilot
07-07-2018, 07:29 PM
If a pilot can test positive in this scenario and lose a career, thereís something wrong. Period. I just turned a corner to walk down some stairs and walked into a could of the crap. 3 guys sitting there having a grand olí time. :mad:

Youíll be fine.

rickair7777
07-08-2018, 11:19 AM
If a pilot can test positive in this scenario and lose a career, there’s something wrong. Period. I just turned a corner to walk down some stairs and walked into a could of the crap. 3 guys sitting there having a grand ol’ time. :mad:

No way anybody is popping positive due to second-hand smoke. You would literally have to spend many hours daily in a small enclosed room with a bunch of people blazing away full bore to even have a remote chance of that.

If you feel yourself getting a buzz, probably time to leave the party, but even then, you'll still have plenty of room for error on the whiz quiz (if you're not an experienced toker, a little bit will go a long way and you'll feel it before it becomes a problem).

This has been well established, because the DoD and DOT need to be able to defeat the second-hand excuse when they catch a doper. The threshold is set pretty high, so they can rule out that excuse (otherwise everyone would use it).

tomgoodman
07-08-2018, 12:06 PM
As the greatest generation dies off and the voting populace becomes boomers, gen X, and mellineals the pot laws will loosen.

Maybe, and maybe not. The Ď60s hippies thought they would do that, but instead they became old geezers like every generation before them. Why would things be any different this time? :rolleyes:

OOfff
07-08-2018, 01:06 PM
Here’s a known, actual dangerous drug (with a dramatically lower LD50 than cannabis) dressed as candy, and parents simply keep it away from kids:

Trader Joe's Dark Chocolate Covered Espresso Beans 14 oz. https://www.amazon.com/dp/B009RS7VIK/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_api_IQNqBbXHXV0VA

rickair7777
07-08-2018, 01:14 PM
Hereís a known, actual dangerous drug (with a dramatically lower LD50 than cannabis) dressed as candy, and parents simply keep it away from kids:

Trader Joe's Dark Chocolate Covered Espresso Beans 14 oz. https://www.amazon.com/dp/B009RS7VIK/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_api_IQNqBbXHXV0VA

Haha, my kid got hold of some of those at about age 2. She was still up watching PBS at 0200 when I finally went to bed. A bit cranky the next day though.

I didn't know it was dangerous though.

NeverHome
07-10-2018, 07:24 AM
Haha, my kid got hold of some of those at about age 2. She was still up watching PBS at 0200 when I finally went to bed. A bit cranky the next day though.

I didn't know it was dangerous though.

Sooooo dangerous. Iíve finally gone clean. Took a few years. Some days I would wake up, and first thing I would do was reach for my beans. Relationships destroyed. It was terrible.

I got my beans from the Ben and Jerryís in EWR C concourse. So delicious, so energizing, so expensive (seriously WTF). Hmmmm now that I think of it, I may go get some :D

RomeoJulietLima
10-26-2018, 08:30 AM
Legalize it. Heck, it helps pilots in need. I understand the implications.
If a male pilot gets cancer or anything who did his due gilagents. Then yes he gets to smoke,
Well he did. This was on medical and he retired. It helped him so much! I canít tell you how much!
:D



Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.1