negative dip test, but still needs to be lab confirmed??? help please!

[smashimus]

stressing

New Member
Since: Today
Posts: 1
Likes: 0

I've been scouring the net and forums trying to find a similar situation, but can't seem to find anything quite like this.

A close friend of mine recently went for a pre-employment drug screening. The night before, this person had taken an at home test, which was clearly negative for THC. This person has not smoked in a month and has been drinking water/ exercising to help the process along.

When this person was tested by dip stick urine analysis, the tech first said there was an extremely faint line, then said she wasn't sure if there was a line at all. Friend says there WAS a line and the tech agreed, but said she needed to send it to a lab for confirmation. On friend's paperwork, the result was negative, but was pending lab confirmation. They told my friend that they could go ahead and come in for their orientation and they would finish this persons physical pending lab results, which would be back in a few days. This happened on a Saturday, so I'm sure my friend will not hear back until Tuesday or so.

From my understanding, any line in the test area is considered A NEGATIVE, NO MATTER HOW FAINT. And since the lab tech wrote down negative as the result, I don't understand why it needs to be lab tested. Friend is freaking out. If the test is confirmed with GC/MS, what are the chances friend will fail? Has this situation happened to anyone else? What was the outcome?

Also, we are not sure what test was used, just that the tech used a dip stick and we are not sure what kind of lab confirmation will be done. Any advice, thoughts, opinions, anything would be much appreciated.

[Burnt Toast]

On friend's paperwork, the result was negative, but was pending lab confirmation.

If a confirmation test is in order (due to a non-negative on the initial assay, or an untrained techs misinterpretation of an assays faint line), a lab is not allowed to indicate a "negative" on the CCF form until the confirmation test results have been verified.

[smashimus]

Oh, really?

None of this makes any sense. The way the test was handled, his paperwork, the way the lab tech responded.....just seems weird. If they do send it for gc/ms, is there any chance it will come back positive? Do they automatically run questionable results through gc/ms or will the lab perform another assay first?

[Burnt Toast]

Do they automatically run questionable results through gc/ms or will the lab perform another assay first? Confirmation tests utilize the GC/MS so a quantitative value can be provided.



If they do send it for gc/ms, is there any chance it will come back positive? Read post #2 in its entirety of this thread:
http://boards.cannabis.com/drug-testing/195500-passing-quest-diagnostics-ua-drug-test.html

[smashimus]

Thanks so much for the help!

[smashimus]

5 business days later, no word. 7 days if you're counting the weekend. Since a CCF form wasn't given out, does that mean an MRO doesn't call the donor, it just goes straight to the employer? I'm assuming in this case, the employer just calls.

This wait f*cking sucks.

[seasonedgrower616]

Hello there, They are probbally sending it to the lab to see if your urine was deluted (drinking to much water) or you tried to use something to cover it. It may come up inconclusive. How nervous was he when this happened? I came up positive on a drop test while on parole. I requested it to be sent to the lab myself because I knew I was clean. It turned out clean, there was a defective drop test. Also alot of different things can give you a false positive. Ibuprofin, and a few other things. I wouldn't sweat it to bad. Patients is a vertue

[smashimus]

Alright so update: he failed. By 1 ng.

They called 9 business after, told him to to come to HR. He was terminated, and they gave him a copy of his lab results. Apparently, they did the confirm at 10ng, his was at 11ng. So BurntToast was correct, if they had tested at 15ng like normal, he would have passed, but they didn't.

Ugh. I just hope in the future he can reapply and try again. I guess even the union rep who was present was I'm sorry dude, that really sucks and tried to con the HR guy into letting him retest, but no-go. He's really torn up about it. Anyway, thanks for all your help guys.