AA (Aviation and Alcohol)

I'm down with the alcohol testing by the FAA and companies. I'm still not down with the drug testing though. The main reason is that drug testing doesn't determine if someone is under the influence of a drug. Just if any trace amounts of a drug are in someone's system. I consider that more of a "lifestyle" test than a drug test.

More importantly though, drug tests are pretty inaccurate ,easy to fool, and racist.

Inaccurate: the best example would be Poppy seed's.

Easy to fool: A drop of bleach or visine will completely ruin a sample.

Racist: Many drugs metabolize at a different rate for different ethnicities. Marijuana for instance stays in African-American's hair for a much longer period of time than caucasions.

I'm down with drug and alcohol testing, just not "lifestyle" testing. The test should determine if someone is under the influence of a substance. Not if there are trace amounts of a substance in their system from the previous weekend, or month.
 
I hear what you're saying greaper007, but someone who is living a lifesyle which includes drug abuse is not elligible for a medical certificate, so under the influence or not, they cannot act as a required crewmember.
 
flyguy said:
I hear what you're saying greaper007, but someone who is living a lifesyle which includes drug abuse is not elligible for a medical certificate, so under the influence or not, they cannot act as a required crewmember.
Click to expand...

Obviously and we all abide by that (especially me considering the threads I put out here). However, a little political dissent is necessary for a healthy democracy. I know that drug testing is now a well entrenched annoyance that we all now have to live with (sort of like the patriot act). I'll never agree with it on a constitutional level though.

Beyond that, why don't you consider moderate alcohol usage as substance abuse?
 
When I was in the army, i got the great additional duty of Unit Prevention Leader. BAsically, I administered the unit and Army's Drug Testing program. I'm sure each airline is a bit different, but if you show up to work and then claim that you need "help" it's too late. You have to ask for help before you get busted. I wouldn't always count on the 8 hr rule either. If you go out on a bender, 8 hrs is not nearly enough. And if you are getting older like me, hangovers last all day! Flying with a hangover just sucks. I'd rather be at home on my knees in front of the toilet with the dry heaves.

Here is a tip for any urine test though. Most docs/collection type people usually tell you to "fill the cup to this line" and thats all they need. Always fill the cup! THis gives the lab enough juice to do the testing twice if something were to come up or give a false positive. IF you only provide enough of a sample for them to test once and you get a false positive, it's their word against yours. Sometimes it takes hrs or days to get a result from the lab, and if you come back "hot" it will be too late for you to provide a clean sample. IF you fill the cup, they can use the rest to retest your sample from the time you provided it.

There is your whiz quiz trivia for the day, and knowing is half the battle......... the other half is stoping long enough to put down the cup and finish the job :-)
 
Don't know if this is the incident, but there is an MSNBC video report about a Comair pilot being grounded due to alcohol.

Comair pilot grounded (you have to sit through a commercial before the news story starts playing)
 
greaper007 said:
Obviously and we all abide by that (especially me considering the threads I put out here). However, a little political dissent is necessary for a healthy democracy. I know that drug testing is now a well entrenched annoyance that we all now have to live with (sort of like the patriot act). I'll never agree with it on a constitutional level though.

Beyond that, why don't you consider moderate alcohol usage as substance abuse?
Click to expand...
Surely you're not suggesting that as a passenger, you'd feel comfortable with a captain who is a heroine addict, as long as he's not high while he's flying? But if the perfect drug test can only detect intoxication, how can we get the junkies out of the cockpit? The regulations and the drug tests are in place to do just that.

There is a difference between a moderate alcohol useage and alcoholism, but some people cannot handle even moderate amounts of alcohol. When it becomes an addiction, and the person loses control of the moderate alcohol usage, then it becomes abuse. But even an alcoholic who is sober at the time can be very dangerous. Is it okay for an alcoholic to be in charge of an aircraft carrying 300 pax as long as he's able to control his problem while he's working? How long can he keep the problem under control? It only takes one time pushing his addiction to the limit that will cost the lives of many innocent people. And again there lies the reason behind the drug testing. Get them out of the cockpit before it is too late.

I think this is an issue where a little political dissent for the sake of a health democracy should be put aside for the sake of protecting lives.
 
ComplexHiAv8r said:
Why were the statistics only for 2003, 2004, first half 2005?? Isnt this the end of 2006?
Click to expand...

Sounds pretty up to date (for the government) to me. I was reading a recent article about how breast cancer has declined by 7 percent in 2003. I immediately wondered about '04 and '05. It turns out that the data has not been collected yet.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top