1. Dear Drugs-Forum readers: We are a small non-profit that runs one of the most read drug information & addiction help websites in the world. We serve over 4 million readers per month, and have costs like all popular websites: servers, hosting, licenses and software. To protect our independence we do not run ads. We take no government funds. We run on donations which average $25. If everyone reading this would donate $5 then this fund raiser would be done in an hour. If Drugs-Forum is useful to you, take one minute to keep it online another year by donating whatever you can today. Donations are currently not sufficient to pay our bills and keep the site up. Your help is most welcome. Thank you.
    PLEASE HELP

Opinions - Does touching meth show on drug screen?

Discussion in 'Methamphetamine' started by Ambassador517, Mar 6, 2012.

  1. Ambassador517

    Ambassador517 Newbie

    Reputation Points:
    5
    Messages:
    5
    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2011
    32 y/o from U.S.A.
    If a person cooks but does not use meth will it show on a drug screen through handling?
     
  2. cloud_nine

    cloud_nine Silver Member

    Reputation Points:
    120
    Messages:
    198
    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2011
    from U.S.A.
    Yes,if you handle enough of it,it is possible.
     
  3. Ambassador517

    Ambassador517 Newbie

    Reputation Points:
    5
    Messages:
    5
    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2011
    32 y/o from U.S.A.
    Not a lot of crystallized product made contact with skin but concerned about possible freebase/solvent entry during filtration through tiny cut in finger. Results come in two days. The government demands a urine sacrifice three times a week. Precautions underway to prevent further mishaps. A latex propitiation.
     
  4. CaptainTripps

    CaptainTripps Law & Policy sections Platinum Member & Advisor

    Reputation Points:
    3,478
    Messages:
    712
    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2010
    from Washington, U.S.A.
    I had a friend who went to drug court. They had to have urine tests a couple of times per week. The drug court is sort of an experiment that has to show it's "worthiness" if it is going to continue. So they are looking for successes. They really don't want people to fail. So as a result they are very upfront about how they operate. They want the participants to know the score.

    My friend was lucky to get drug court as they are not actually a drug user. But with a good attorney and a little "nuance" of the facts they got in. The person that ran the drug program was not stupid and knew that my friend was not a user, but a dealer. My friend was healthy and basically out of place with the others. Also they were not afraid of drug tests and were very open about that (which is not smart in a diversion program for addicts only). When the counselor was explaining things, they actually looked at her and said, "and for the dealers out there, be sure to wear gloves, as handling crystal meth will show up on the drug screen".

    It should be noted that they used state of the art drug tests, that were very sensitive. They stressed avoiding second hand exposure. It should also be noted that my friend had said that when handling large amounts that they had gotten high from it. If it can get you high, it can be tested for with the right test.
     
  5. Ambassador517

    Ambassador517 Newbie

    Reputation Points:
    5
    Messages:
    5
    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2011
    32 y/o from U.S.A.
    Apparently meth is not as trans-dermal as originally fear. Passed go, collected $200 and ever vigilant.
     
  6. Lrs721

    Lrs721 Silver Member

    Reputation Points:
    170
    Messages:
    200
    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2011
    from U.S.A.
    well, what about being near smoke- as in, sitting in the drivers seat while a passenger smoked in the car. This is not really relevant now, but I had adrug test 3 days later (which is about the end of detectability range if I am not mistaken) and totally passed- but I was very worried beforehand as she was basically hotboxed inside of a tiny car- but she wonders, is second hand smoke normally detectable?

    there are a lot of news articles where parents of young children are either cooking or in possession of meth - usually children are older than two but younger than 13 year olds- and the children get taken to CPS and almost always test positive for meth- is this because they are exposed to second- hand smoke? Or is it more likely that they have somehow injested it? this question applies to children of users more so than children of cooks btw.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Sep 10, 2017
  7. CaptainTripps

    CaptainTripps Law & Policy sections Platinum Member & Advisor

    Reputation Points:
    3,478
    Messages:
    712
    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2010
    from Washington, U.S.A.
    Going back to the drug court experience my friend had (and yes this really was a friend) they specifically mentioned second hand smoke was detectable. In fact they were told that should they accidentally become exposed to second hand smoke that they should report it before being tested. If they did report it and the levels detected were consistent with second hand smoke that they would in all likelihood not be violated, but if they said nothing and tested dirty they most likely would be violated. Of course if this happened frequently, that would raise other issues, as they were not supposed to be around drug users. But they knew that this was easier in theory than in practice in today's society.

    Also while not meth, it is well known that with pot, second hand smoke is readily detectable and that threshold levels are set to address this issue. Many people take drug tests and show trace amounts in their systems, but still test "negative" for purposes of determining if the person had used pot.

    What is "normally" detectable is hard to say as I am sure there are a lot of factors involved, like whether it is actually smoked in front of the children or the children just happen to enter a room after it has been smoked. But assuming that you are correct that young children of meth users "almost always" test positive, I would assume, that it must be second hand smoke as it is hard to believe that children of meth users almost universally consume it in some other fashion. It has been my experience that users of harder drugs that have children make an effort to ensure that their kids don't get into their stash. One they don't want their kids to get hurt, two they don't want to take the fall if their children do get hurt, three they don't want their kids taking the stuff to school for "show and tell" and four drugs are expensive. I know that meth users can be irresponsible and kids do get into stashes, but I think that is the exception rather than the rule.

    It is hard to compare being in a car for a short period of time with a lot of meth smoke in the air, with long term, somewhat continuous exposure that children of meth users might have. I do believe you are correct about the three days being near the end of detectability range for most people. However, I had a friend (yes a real friend) who has cardiovascular problems and his system did not metabolize things at a normal rate. He needed surgery and they would not do it if he tested positive. He "'accidentally' took a hit off a meth pipe and tested positive after 5 days, only trace amounts by they post phoned his surgery over it.

    Not sure why I was being tested, but they might want to subtly inquire about what happens if they are accidentally exposed to second hand smoke, what the consequences are. Who knows they may have a policy similar to the drug court. It would be worth finding out for future reference.

    Also, sometimes as a passenger, you don't have a lot of control over things, but as a driver, I would have insisted that my passengers not smoke drugs in the car while I was driving. Drug test or no drug test.

    FYI, the term "swim" has fallen out of favor on this forum. Please try to use a different way to avoid self incrimination.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Sep 10, 2017
  8. Lrs721

    Lrs721 Silver Member

    Reputation Points:
    170
    Messages:
    200
    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2011
    from U.S.A.
    oops, it wasnt supposed to come off like they knew this for a fact or "almost all" definitely was meant to say that the majority of what she has heard on the news or online of a parent arrested for meth, it usually says the children were tested by child services and were positive for meth- not to say that this is always the case of parents or even that it is always stated in articles- this could just be her memory only really retaining the shocking aspect of young kids testing positive for meth..

    anyway, it was a long time ago and for probation, but probation has long since ended- so post was meant only to gain knowledge not to stay out of trouble.
     
  9. OPIamore

    OPIamore Silver Member

    Reputation Points:
    85
    Messages:
    63
    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2012
    from California, U.S.A.
    depending on the test you can test +. 3xs a week sounds like a criminal/felony probation situation, that said... if you somehow are required to wear a sweat patch as opposed to urine it could possibly show positive even after the fact. the research i have found in regard to PHARMCHEK patches shows positives for cocaine and meth from exposure.... confirmation test were done and proved otherwise.


    btw... drug court statistics for maintaining a healthy drug free lifestyle after graduation are phenomenally high. that just may be where i reside tho

    OPIamore added 3 Minutes and 26 Seconds later...

    the secondhand smoke issue is USUALLY a non issue... that is why there are ng/ml cutoff limits. it is so prevent such things from happening... i.e. poppy seeds, etc. not to say it is not possible. but unlikely
     
    Last edited: Mar 9, 2012
  10. Kidx

    Kidx Newbie

    Reputation Points:
    5
    Messages:
    52
    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2012
    from U.S.A.
    No, it can't. You can't injest enough that way.
     
Tags: