PDA

View Full Version : Long, winding road to life-or-death test



Magic_Fairy_Gal
07-09-2012, 10:33 PM
A few years ago I was diagnosed with cystic fibrosis. It has advanced to the state where I need a lung transplant in the next two years to live. The selection process for transplants is very rigorous, and even if medical cannabis is legally prescribed for a patient, you get no transplant if you test positive. It's not rational or fair, but it's just how it works.

I am 38 and have used cannabis almost every day since I was 18. I've had lung problems my entire life, so I only smoked for few years. I vaped for a few years as well. Mostly, I've eaten cannabis products I cook myself (I'm very good at it), and with the exceptions of times when I was hospitalized for breathing problems, I've eaten cannabis daily for over ten years.

Until last year I worked as an art teacher in a high school, so I have passed many employment urine tests over the years by subbing my boyfriend's urine. But given the seriousness of the situation, it's not a good idea to sub this time.

I panicked a bit in May when my evaluation was scheduled for July 24. I had hoped it would be in August so I'd have three full months to clean up. For years I've read forum horror stories from chronic users who needed a gabillion days to pass a test, so I mentally prepared for the worst. I bought a pack of 20 tests on Ebay to test myself over the eight weeks.

My BMI is 25 on the dot. My limited lung function reduces my ability to exercise, but part of the transplant approval process involves physical rehabilitation, so in May I also had to start a vigorous exercise program four days a week for six weeks.

I hadn't really thought about the quantity of cannabis I was ingesting, but I realize now it probably hasn't been that much for a couple of years. I go through maybe a quarter a month... but it's a quarter of high-grade medical (sometimes pure kief). I've read some people who claimed that eating cannabis makes it harder to flush out of your system, and although I kind of know better, you can't be 100% sure until you try it yourself, right?

I took a test the last day I ate anything, and failed (of course!). On day 7, I passed a test using mid-day urine, and was quite surprised about it! On day 10, I passed again with another ghost line, this time using first morning urine.

On day 14, I passed yet again, and given the amount of pressure and pain I was experiencing by that point, I was VERY tempted to thaw out some frozen canna-cookies. I thought maybe I had overestimated the amount of time it would take to clean up, and I could just quit with two weeks lead time. Thankfully, I had a doctor's appointment that day, and since the pain had my blood pressure was jacked way up, he gave me something to help a bit. The pain is still bad, but I've held strong.

I passed again on day 21, but then a funny thing happened on day 28... I decided to test myself right after an exercise session to see if I was burning off cannabinoids to detectable levels. Sure enough: I FAILED at day 28 with the second urine of the day!

As of day 36, I've been able to pass consistently when testing post-exercise urine with a not-quite a ghost line (and my exercise program ended last week). Today was day 48, and I also passed.

Given how high the stakes are, I would have been more worried about the failure on day 28 had I not learned the day before that the test I will undergo is NOT a urine test. It's a blood test. And as far as I can tell, you don't need nearly as long to pass a blood test as urine. So my two-month dry out might not have been necessary at all. It's not worth risking my life to find out how long it takes to clean out for a blood test, so no regrets.

I'll post again as I come closer to the 24th, but in light of how many "it took a gabillion days to pass a test" stories that are always around, it might be useful to see an anecdote from a long-term user who was able to pass quickly, if not consistently.

killerweed420
07-11-2012, 01:49 AM
Sounds like you should be in good shape. On the odd chance that you do end up with a positive blood test just talk to the doctor and explain how long you've been clean and that it was edibles not smoke.
Here in Washington the legislature finally passed a law that organ transplants can not be stopped because of a positive test for cannabis. All the medical cannabis states should be passing that same law.
I wish you luck on your transplant. I tried to donat a lung to my brother before he died but he didn't want to put me through it. I've never smoked tobacco and now I'm retired so I could easily have lived off of one lung.

azdesertdweller
07-11-2012, 03:33 PM
let us know if you pass "the Big One"....i really don't trust those "test kits"(labs are far more inclusive when they test)...im sure they could be used for monitering levels...until you dropped off the test kits scale...but labs test ppm(parts per million) with mass spectrometers...(not available in kit form(sorry)...your best bet..total abstention....

Burnt Toast
07-11-2012, 09:30 PM
i really don't trust those "test kits"(labs are far more inclusive when they test)...im sure they could be used for monitering levels...until you dropped off the test kits scale...but labs test ppm(parts per million) with mass spectrometers...(not available in kit form(sorry) Labs use assays for the initial screening which function on the same principle as the home test kits (being assays themselves). Therefore, neither are more accurate or reliable than the other.
The Gas Chromotography/Mass Spectrometry (GC/MS) is used for confirmation and only used if the sample tests "non-negative" on the initial assay screen. It would be way too costly for both the lab and the client to use the GC/MS as the primary analysis.

Assays are a pass/fail endeavor and lack the ability to yield a quantitative value (unlike the GC/MS). Therefore, they are far from being the methodology of choice for monitoring THC metabolite levels.

Regardless if its an assay or the GC/MS, THC metabolite concentrations are measured in nanograms per milliliter (ng/ml), rather than parts per million.