Another Reason Not to go to Denver

[wmenorr67]

http://www.aol.com/article/news/2016/11/16/denver-first-us-city-legalize-marijuana-bars-restaurants/21607365/?ncid=txtlnkusaolp00000058&

So now it will be legal to light up at doobie at a bar or restaurant in Denver.  Of course there will be a few hurdles but still think the slippery slope just got steeper and a lot more slippery.

Still too many professions that have random drug screening and now you are going to subject people to second hand marijuana smoke.  Why is that any better than second hand smoke of any type?

[RoadKingLarry]

I'm pretty sure it has to be "edibles" and not smoked.

[Fly320s]

Does Colorado have laws against public intoxication?

[TechMan]

I'm pretty sure it has to be "edibles" and not smoked.

Quote from the OP link:

People in Denver will soon get to smoke marijuana at restaurants and bars — a first for a U.S. city.

[K Frame]

I'm pretty sure it has to be "edibles" and not smoked.

"I'm pretty sure it has to be "edibles" and not smoked."

Think again.

EDIT IN -- Hum... I may have misinterpreted your comment. In any event, the point about second hand pot smoke below is valid.

Cannabinoids, or at least the big ones, enter the body just as readily during smoking as they do when eaten. If they didn't, you wouldn't get the effects of smoking pot.

The concentrations from second hand smoke are going to be FAR lower than they would be if you had eaten/smoked pot.

Companies with workers in/traveling to those areas know about this, and are planning accordingly.

[MechAg94]

If I remember correctly, all the hystericals against public tobacco smoking were not worried about the nicotine. 

[Fly320s]

I'm sure the DOT will be quite reasonable when dealing with people who fail a drug test do to second-hand pot smoke.

I know, the odds are very small that could happen.

[wmenorr67]

I'm sure the DOT will be quite reasonable when dealing with people who fail a drug test do to second-hand pot smoke.

I know, the odds are very small that could happen.

Not just DOT but the military.

[MechAg94]

Would this also show up in a hair follicle test?

[BobR]

Not just DOT but the military.

I have no idea how things have changed but a couple of decades ago when I was the piss coordinator for a 300+ man squadron the thresholds on the testing equipment was such that if a person popped positive there was literally no chance of it coming from second hand exposure. At least that was official the party line. I did several full squadron piss tests, those people were working on the planes I flew on, I had a very personal interest in keeping them drug free.

Some day I will tell you about the Court Martial I sat on, we dubbed the guy "The Coke Snatcher". He earned a Big Chicken Dinner (BCD) for his part.

bob

[MillCreek]

We do surprise urine drug screens on our chronic pain patients.  If they test positive for THC on the UDS, we send the sample along for GC/MS confirmation, which is definitive.  Second-hand smoke exposure will not trigger a positive THC on GC/MS.  If it triggers positive, the person has indeed been smoking or eating THC as the primary exposure.

[RevDisk]

So now it will be legal to light up at doobie at a bar or restaurant in Denver.  Of course there will be a few hurdles but still think the slippery slope just got steeper and a lot more slippery.

How does that work when Colorado Clean Indoor Air Act essentially bans all indoor smoking? The only time where this would be legal would be a licensed cigar bar. If one is regularly drug tested and is already a smoker, then yes outdoor smoking areas or licensed cigar bars may be a concern.

Otherwise, doesn't sound like an issue.

[RevDisk]

I have no idea how things have changed but a couple of decades ago when I was the piss coordinator for a 300+ man squadron the thresholds on the testing equipment was such that if a person popped positive there was literally no chance of it coming from second hand exposure. At least that was official the party line. I did several full squadron piss tests, those people were working on the planes I flew on, I had a very personal interest in keeping them drug free.

Some day I will tell you about the Court Martial I sat on, we dubbed the guy "The Coke Snatcher". He earned a Big Chicken Dinner (BCD) for his part.

bob

The party line is probably incorrect. Theoretically, those quick drug tests are ONLY to be used to screen samples for further validation by GC/MS. GC/MS testing is very accurate and can absolutely tell the difference between primary usage and second hand exposure. Unless one's using doses of a drug too low for any possible recreational usage. This is virtually never done in practice, because people incorrectly think the quick drug tests are accurate.

It sounds, unshockingly, like MillCreek knows what he's doing. That's the proper procedure.  It's not common outside of medical patient testing. I've heard of medical facilities who follow that procedure for patients, but not their employee hiring. 

[BobR]

Now that my memory has been jiggled, it sometimes takes a bit, the threshold for the quickie tests was reasonably high. If the initial test came up positive then they would get the GC/MS treatment to confirm. If either of those were negative the test was considered negative.

bob

[zxcvbob]

We do surprise urine drug screens on our chronic pain patients.  If they test positive for THC on the UDS, we send the sample along for GC/MS confirmation, which is definitive.  Second-hand smoke exposure will not trigger a positive THC on GC/MS.  If it triggers positive, the person has indeed been smoking or eating THC as the primary exposure.

I'm curious why you care if a chronic pain patient is using pot.  That seems like a class (like cancer patients) where you'd "Don't ask, don't tell"

[MillCreek]

I'm curious why you care if a chronic pain patient is using pot.  That seems like a class (like cancer patients) where you'd "Don't ask, don't tell"

There is not (yet) a sufficient body of evidence-based literature showing that marijuana in combination with opiates is advantageous in treating chronic pain.  My personal opinion is that there will be such literature in the years to come, and marijuana may prove to be a useful adjunct or even substitute for opiates in the treatment of chronic pain.  When that happens, I suspect medical practice will follow the literature.

[Fitz]

of course, the more prudent question is: who cares why they're smoking it?

[BobR]

It is getting some study though. With the amount of opiate abuse in the US anything that could decrease the amount being prescribed should be welcomed with open arms. But will adjunct use of pot really decrease the demand for opiates, I don't think so. :(

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22880540

bob

[MillCreek]

For our chronic opiate patients using marijuana, we give them a choice to either stop the marijuana and we can continue to prescribe, or if they want to try marijuana instead, we will stop prescribing the opiates.  So far, a small number have opted to try just using marijuana for pain control instead.  The results so far have been mixed: some people think the marijuana is working for them, and some have opted to go back on opiates and stop the marijuana. 

Some of our local pain centers are doing small-scale trials of marijuana with opiates, and we await their findings with interest.  They tell me that the sticky wicket is the patients are not always buying the same strain/THC concentration of marijuana, which means the studies are poorly controlled for lack of a standardized product, and may make the results anecdotal at best.

[zxcvbob]

Opium and its derivatives are a gift from God for treating acute pain.  It's not so great for treating chronic pain, but maybe they just haven't found the right formulation yet.  (meanwhile, it's still better than nothing and we shouldn't stigmatize it so much)

I'm surprised the FDA and DEA are even allowing testing with marijuana; they have so much invested in the "Marijuana is the most dangerous drug of all, specifically because it's NOT dangerous" doctrine they have been blocking any meaningful testing for decades.  I get it that the testing data will be difficult to process due to variability in the dosing, and purified THC that you can dose is not the same thing as raw weed with all its other active compounds.  Marijuana is a gift from God too; seems like we should try to figure out what it's good for.

[MillCreek]

http://www.medpagetoday.com/Blogs/KevinMD/61545

An interesting article on physicians in the drug gatekeeper role.