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.

That they can’t 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.

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 won’t ever remove THC from the panel of drugs tested for. I can’t 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 haven’t 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, it’s 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.

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

Actually it’s a big misconception that the phychoactive component THC is directly tested for, it’s 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 everyone’s body for an equal (or near to) amount of time in the way alcohol, or any substance that’s 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 “reffer madness” 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. People’s 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 wouldn’t 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 you’re peeing clean on Monday. It’s not like that drug ever caused any problems for pilots.

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?"






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:

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 aren’t 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 you’re descriminating.

I don’t 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 it’s 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 don’t hold any weight once long standing biases are dropped. Times change. Probably wasn’t that long ago no one could imagine a flight deck without cigarettes.

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

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, I’m sure we’d run into similar situations. It’s why some people have hangovers when others don’t.

It’s 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.

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 I’m not aware of any. Would set a new precedent.

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

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.

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

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

Can you cite where you found this? I am not trying to second guess you, I am genuinally curious.

Google is your friend (or enemy). Check out the FAA on legal OTC drug use.

https://www.faa.gov/news/safety_brie...opic_16-09.pdf

GF

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 it’s 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 aren’t many funded studies to determine impairment levels. There’s a forensic scientist running around the halls of state legislature in CO claiming 0 ng/ml is a sound threshold. But that’s 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 “0”. 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. It’ll be years before there is a consensus to convince the FAA. It’s been legal for decades in other ICAO countries, what are their standards? I don’t know.

Rapid field tests/roadside tests = Maury Povich of science. If it comes back that I have fathered 3 children with Olivia Wilde, I wouldn’t go buying diapers just yet.

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.

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.

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 it’s just plain stupid.

I agree with your sentiment, but isn’t the whole point of this thread the “what if” 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. There’s no precedent for such a thing and it will be interesting to see how it’s argued out by the lawyers. Additionally another problem is THC isn’t currently being tested for. Only it’s metabolites. New tests need to be developed. I’m 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.

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.

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.

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.

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

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.

Attachment 3770

May become an issue?

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.

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.

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).

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.

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.

This didn’t happen


#reefermadness

Died from OD on marijuana? Must be the first ever

Turned him gay too!