Does urine luck additive work 2013

[Mike8211]

Hey was just wondering if i was better off using a synthetic urine or using an additive such as urline luck additive. Supposedly 7.1.12 additive is 99% effective. I work as a driver and i am subject to random lab tests. I felt great about quickfix 5.7 until my friend lost his correctional job for failing. I have quickfix 5.7. My friend was a co making 70k a yr and now drives a cab. I am in nj. So is my friend that failed. Thoughts? I would like to hear about this. Urine luck swears by this additive. Is it reliable? Would a lab test show an instant result that could screw me? Its not a pre screen, i want to know if this product will work

Mike8211 Reviewed by Mike8211 on 12-23-2013. Does urine luck additive work 2013 Hey was just wondering if i was better off using a synthetic urine or using an additive such as urline luck additive. Supposedly 7.1.12 additive is 99% effective. I work as a driver and i am subject to random lab tests. I felt great about quickfix 5.7 until my friend lost his correctional job for failing. I have quickfix 5.7. My friend was a co making 70k a yr and now drives a cab. I am in nj. So is my friend that failed. Thoughts? I would like to hear about this. Urine luck swears by this Rating: 5

[Burnt Toast]

The topic of drop-in additives has been addressed and answered many times throughout the
DT forum.
Do an Advanced Search with the terms "labs detected additives flagged". You'll have your answer then.

[tenbongs]

Do you have QF 5.7 or 5.7-1? How old is your QF? What is the batch number? What caused your friend to fail? I recently tested some 5.7-1 from about 2 years ago with UrineCheck 7 validity strips. It passed, but was pretty marginal as far as creatinine compared to a sample of real urine. Try to get some more facts to share and maybe alleviate some concerns.

[Mike8211]

All the posts are old thou? Like 2006,2009. Im wondering if anyone knows if urine luck stepped their game up and figured out a new formula. I know that the older posts said labs would detect if an additive was usedi was wondering if the current one in 2013 is effective.

[Burnt Toast]

All the posts are old thou? Like 2006,2009. Im wondering if anyone knows if urine luck stepped their game up and figured out a new formula. I know that the older posts said labs would detect if an additive was usedi was wondering if the current one in 2013 is effective.

The rules of the validity testing game hasnt changed. If anything, the labs are detecting additive useage on a more frequent basis than ever before; and thats largely due to validity checks being lab SOP in recent years. The additives are detected when the sample gets flagged for excessive nitrites, high chromates, and/or an abnormal pH.

[adsad]

The rules of the validity testing game hasnt changed. If anything, the labs are detecting additive useage on a more frequent basis than ever before; and thats largely due to validity checks being lab SOP in recent years. The additives are detected when the sample gets flagged for excessive nitrites, high chromates, and/or an abnormal pH.

I remember earlier urineluck formulas where being detected by the labs and flagged as "adulterated".

The new urineluck does not contain any acids, Glutaraldehyde, nitrites, or pyridine which are checked for with validity test. After using urineluck does the sample have high chromates or is the pH still off? I was under the impression the new formula is undetectable.

[Mike8211]

I was wondering the same. On the urineluck website they say its 99% effective. Why would they say that if it wasnt? I was under the impression that thier new formula was different then older ones which were no good. There are no current threads about anyone using the newest one. Only old ones from 5 yrs ago when it first began being unreliable. I wish someone would post current info on the state of urineluck

[Burnt Toast]

After using urineluck does the sample have high chromates or is the pH still off?

Both of these conditions have been exhibited. However, a sizeable percentage of the spiked samples get popped on the colorimetric assay for Oxidant/PCC, which is the initial screening panel for Chromium IV (chromates).

On the urineluck website they say its 99% effective. Why would they say that if it wasnt?

Can you say sales pitch?

Remember, youre dealing with a business whose reason for being is to sell products to consumers - and lots of them. It doesnt have to take an economist to realize that sales pitches are a business operators lifeline.

There are no current threads about anyone using the newest one. Only old ones from 5 yrs ago when it first began being unreliable. I wish someone would post current info on the state of urineluck

Thats likely due to people realizing that if youre going to sneak something in, it might as well be something thats going to work - a clean urine sample for a sub. These same people may also realize that its alot more easier to pour in a clean sub than to fumble around with 2 additive vials (not to mention the filled sample cup as well) in the bathroom stall.