59 replies to this topic

[Give It Away]

SWIM has a theory about the first contact roadside drug tests done by the police in Australia. Having never experienced one (and not ever wanting too) I know very little about them. Anyway, they have never heard of anybody who has tested positive to MJ from the mouth swab. Neither have I actually and neither has anybody I have talked to about it. Amphs yes. MJ no.
After the swab I believe they take a blood test which shows MJ (and anything else they test for) but until then - no MJ.
Has anybody here experienced this 1st hand? Or know of someone who has?

[El presidente Hillbillios]

Yeah my mate got swabbed on the side of the road and tested positive for cannabis. Lost his licence

[Amazonian]

What about if you munged on a hot chilli or something just as you were being pulled over ? Maybe that would mask the MJ ?

[SallyD]

I've watched (or sort of watched) a show on TV where they pull people over for mouth swabs and breath tests.

From what I've seen the mouth swab seems to give a lot of false positives which is verified when they drag the victim into the bus for a more reliable test.
I've seen instances on that show where the roadside test has given a positive result for amphetamines and THC and the follow up test has proven negative, but the second test has revealed another substance in their blood.
The people who have been charged have been pissed off because of the way it's all conducted.If the first (faulty) test didn't give a false positive then the pigs wouldn't have had reason to ream their arse in the first place.

It could be argued that the original test is faulty and the pigs are happy to use it because it gives them a reason to bend you over and give it to you up the arse. While they are in there they might be lucky enough to find something else by a fluke, something that they never would have had just cause to go looking for ie no reasonable suspicion. I'd like to see how it would go if challenged in court if their suspicion is based on a faulty test ie is their suspicion still reasonable ?
I can see many excuses why the test could give so many false positives, but to me it just seems like a convenient way for them poke around in your most personal asset (your body & blood) and go through your car as well.

[Give It Away]

Yeah my mate got swabbed on the side of the road and tested positive for cannabis. Lost his licence

Thanks EPH

[Give It Away]

What about if you munged on a hot chilli or something just as you were being pulled over ? Maybe that would mask the MJ ?

I've also had several people tell me about certain 'products' or ways of diffusing the swab. Any takers?

[etherealdrifter]

Yeah my mate got swabbed on the side of the road and tested positive for cannabis. Lost his licence

yep, ditto hilbilli. a foaf(old timer) had been out to visit the 'man'. while there, he sparked up a bunger. 20 mins down the road tested + to dakka.............lost his license. the only good thing that came out of it was that they warned him only for the small amount he had in his possession.
edit-they unburdened him of the choof

Edited by etherealdrifter, 31 December 2011 - 11:54 AM.

[niggles]

Ive heard people claim that they have passed the test by swishing coffee, in their mouths, also by eating lemon or vinegar.
Whilst I can see the logic in the lemon juice or vinegar claim and I imagine it would work, I wonder if they got off just because the test is so inconsistent..

[eatfoo]

I know someone who swears that eating a hole cig will pass you. No chance that works.

Yes you can test poss to MJ even a few days later!

[Moses]

I'd like to see how it would go if challenged in court if their suspicion is based on a faulty test ie is their suspicion still reasonable ?
.

as they do/will not acknowledge that their tests are faulty there is no reason for them to not question the validity of the test so their suspicions are justified

they can justify even the slightest suspicion because they are above reproach

victim- why did you stop me officer
aggressor- because you were driving out of a known druggie haunt
victim- but that is also the main track to the local fishing haunt can you not see the fishing rods hanging out my car??
aggressor- yeah but you look like the type that would be up to no good.

subsequent search of car finds small bag with last little bud in it........voila suspicions justified, just another druggie, the two dozen fish in the esky were obviously just a front so i could go have a cone

[waterboy]

I have heard of some rumours of munging on a jar stash of pickled onions to beat the test for MJ.

Have heard one story that is convincing, probably goes along the lines of consuming something that is acidic can affect the detection reaction. Like lemon/vinegar....

Cheers
WB

[PD.]

I know someone who swears that eating a hole cig will pass you. No chance that works.

A good mate got swabbed after leaving a house where he had just smoked cannabis, he tested + with the swab and was taken to the station. He said he chewed a heap of baccy on the way and the swab at the station was -. He wasnt blood tested, just re-swabbed but he kept his license.
I do agree though that it seems far fetched and is probably more likely a result of an inconsistent test rather than chewing a bit of baccy. If my license were at risk i would give it a crack though, I very rarely see pot these days let alone smoke it so got nada to be concerned about.
Another example of inconsistent testing was when another friend tested + for cannanbis, then back at the station they swabbed him again and got a - result so they tried AGAIN and they got a + for meth........ they had searched his car and found used/empty baggies so i guess they HAD to get him for something, can just see it happening. "Just keep swapping him till we get a hit cuntstable, one of these things is bound to be faulty" Ha, wouldnt surprise me at all if the tests are all marked and the filth know what the result of each test is going to be, "Grab one of the meth swabs sarge, looks like we got a speed freak coming up the road here"

[Distracted]

I've personally known two people that have literally had a cone then drove round the corner and been pulled over and tested. Both tested positive to amphs which they denied so the cop let them go. Two different people from two different social groups pulled over months apart from each other.

I know this is a story about my friends, so for anecdotal evidence it's pretty shit so just take it how you want to.


edit: some more information just to cloud things up. I've been told that anyone who has taken a positive reading to court has had it thrown out.

Edited by Distracted, 01 January 2012 - 12:17 PM.

[Kee]

Do the mouth swaps identify if you're driving UNDER the influence or you've USED the substance recently ~ week? Cause really, I don't smoke and drive for a reason...

[SallyD]

Do the mouth swaps identify if you're driving UNDER the influence or you've USED the substance recently ~ week? Cause really, I don't smoke and drive for a reason...

The tests just look for a detectable level in your bloodstream, it doesn't matter if you had the substance a week ago and are completely sober.
It's a bit like getting done for DUI for a beer you had last week.

[Sonny Jim]

^^^yes this is potentially such a huge concern for many people.

but I think if it goes to court it is run past a clinical toxicologist who will try to determine the level in your blood and try to work out if it was likely that you were under the influence at the the time of testing.

That is what happened to me. I got pulled over and taken in a paddy wagon to the local hospital to have a blood test. Several months later the toxicologist report said that there was cannabis in my system but not enough to indicate that I was under the influence at the time of being tested. I hadn't smoked at all for ~ 3 weeks leading up to the police drug driving test but I am typically a daily smoker, so I am very concerned that the amount in my system in the morning from the previous night could get me in a lot of trouble one day.

There must be some way to fool the mouth swabs, I'd love to experiment with a box of them.

Edited by Sonny Jim, 02 January 2012 - 12:42 AM.

[Ambient Forest]

Thats an interesting thought, getting you're own test kits & figuring out what will throw them. I did a quick google search but could only find urine test kits for sale.

One of my mates got pulled over & swabbed, he was still blazed & pretty paranoid due to the circumstances, but passed the test & didn't get done for anything. The friend tested is pretty skinny to say the least & only smokes every now & then. This may have had something to do with the results or the tests are just inaccurate. One thing's for sure though, he was super relieved when they let him go, as he was definitely high at the time.

[Neoshaman]

I think the whole problem with these tests is that they work on the premise that if the drug is in your system it effects your driving the fact that they are both lkpnown to record false positives and the secondary test is set at a level where the persons driving ability may be actually effected makes me think that they are more a drug war related ploy as oppose to keep road users safe if safety was the priority there would be no need for detection levels to be set so low

[Give It Away]

My friend who is a nurse has heard that Biotane mouthwash (used for dry mouth caused by medication) works against the swabs.

[faustus]

The presence of tetrahydrocannabinol
in saliva, for example, appears to be due primar-
ily to contamination of the oral cavity following
smoking of marijuana cigarettes. Being highly
protein bound, cannabinoids do not pass readily
from blood into saliva and cannabis itself inhibits
salivary excretion (Karlsson & Strom, 1988).


so maybe washing thoroughly with an ethanol-based mouthwash? either that, or stick to shelving.

[Hendry]

feel for the folks who get cased up when they are not even under the influence. Is rinsing with hydrogen peroxide within a 20 min window of providing a sample just a rumor? Short of purchasing the same model of test used by the spanish inquisition and testing the theory one will never know. Does anyone know the type/name/model of test they use?

Call me crazy but amphetamines should be compulsory for anyone operating an 18 wheeler....

[Jonstn]

I've heard a few stories about people coming back with negative results, I think the tests are different in each state though

I heard back when the test were first brought out they were coming up with a shit tonne of false positives and they had to change something in the test? Any clarity on this would be awesome

Edited by Jonstn, 14 January 2012 - 08:24 AM.

[Hendry]

My friend who is a nurse has heard that Biotane mouthwash (used for dry mouth caused by medication) works against the swabs.

Theres an idea! My prescription dexedrine dries out my mouth anyway. While I do not utilize any prohibited chemicals. The reality of these innaccurate tests leaves the innocent man by the roadside, illegally detained, publicly humiliated? while these cuntbags treat him like jack the ripper until proven otherwise. Only the paranoid survive.....

I found the following snippet from here http://www.ncbi.nlm....les/PMC1579288/

"Oral fluid production is stimulated by use of agents such as citric acid candy, chewing gum or other agents. This will inevitably change the pH and concentration of drug in the oral fluid. This has been shown to lower concentrations of codeine by about two- to six-fold,^12,13 two- to four-fold for methamphetamine,¹⁴ and about five-fold for cocaine.¹⁵ It is likely that similar changes will occur for other drugs."


"A number of drugs are known to affect the secretion of oral fluid.¹¹ Most commonly these are amphetamines, including the designer forms such as ecstasy (MDMA), and cannabis. Other drugs include the sedating antihistamines, antipsychotic drugs, anticholinergic drugs and a number of antidepressants. There are less commonly used drugs that increase flow and these include clonidine, pilocarpine and beta-2 stimulants (salbutamol, terbutaline etc).
Consequently, there is significant intra- and inter-subject variation in relation to drug concentrations depending on the technique used, the physiology of the person and the influence of factors affecting drug concentration in oral fluid.


Since the collection of oral fluid specimen can be viewed by a second person without infringing privacy it does not suffer from the same issues regarding possible adulteration or substitution as for urine.¹³ While this can be a distinct advantage, it must be recognised that methods can be employed to potentially affect the collection of oral fluid or the concentration of drugs in oral fluid. The prior administration of drugs and a range of physiological factors covered earlier can affect drug concentration. Foodstuffs, various beverages and various toothpastes did not affect the concentration of drugs of abuse using the Oratect® device 30 min after exposure.¹⁶ The use of commercial adulterants or other products capable of acting as adulterants, such as Clear Choice®, Fizzy Flush^TM, Spit and Clean®/™ mouth wash and Cool Mint Listerine® also had no substantial effect after 30 min. In an early study using a small number of volunteers, the consumption of beer immediately smoking a marijuana joint appeared to lower concentrations of THC in oral fluid at 1 h post dose.¹⁷ It is likely that a short rinsing effect is seen with these agents and others, including water, for a short period after use. Since the oral fluid in the mouth is rapidly turned over, a wait of several minutes should allow re-equilibration of drug in the surrounding tissues.The rinsing effect with drugs is in some way similar to the contamination of breath alcohol by recently consumed alcohol in that a wait of 15–20 min allows any mouth alcohol to be removed by normal physiological processes.¹⁸ However, more research is needed to investigate this phenomenon in oral fluid for the various collection techniques"

[Jaurk]

I know someone who swears that eating a hole cig will pass you.

I'd rather gargle some vinegar and bite a chilli.

[SunChaser]

I got tested a few months ago and came back completely negative, about 20 minutes after leaving the house. Had a big sip of water before I left, but that was it. I personally think the test just occasionally gives false positives for cannabis and then the person usually probably admits guilt. I did read a news story a few years ago saying how a lot of people admit guilt before the are even actually tested.

Also, does anyone remember the first bloke to test positive to cannabis in Australia? He got his face flashed all over the news, then came back with a negative blood test.

Peace