Marijuana Detection Windows That Drug Courts Use

[7rashcan]

I'm writing a research paper and am trying to locate the procedures that drug courts use when it comes to marijuana and it's detection window. I've read several published studies suggesting a wide variety of marijuana detection times, ranging from very short (12 days for chronic abuse) to very long (67 days for chronic abuse) before a user produces a negative urine sample. From what I've read, it appears that the norm, or average, if you will, is around 30 days for chronic abuse. Two studies that I've found also suggest a 30-35 day window before a chronic user begins to test negative on urine samples.

This is all fine and dandy, but then I found this article published by the National Drug Court Resource Center (NDCRC):
http://www.ndcrc.org/content/marijua...tectable-urine

In the .pdf document, the author states the following:
"Based upon recent scientific evidence, at the 50 ng/mL cutoff concentration for the detection of cannabinoids in urine (using the currently available laboratory-based screening methods) it would be unlikely for a chronic user to produce a positive urine drug test result for longer than 10 days after the last smoking episode. Although there are no scientific cannabinoid elimination studies on chronic users using non-instrumented testing devices, one would assume that if the on-site devices are properly calibrated at the 50 ng/mL cutoff level the detection guidance would be the same.

At the 20 ng/mL cutoff concentration for the detection of cannabinoids in urine (using the currently available laboratory-based screening methods) it would be uncommon for a chronic marijuana smoker to produce a positive urine drug test result longer than 21 days after the last smoking episode."

This statement begs the question: What recent scientific evidence? I've searched through all of the references that this author lists but have yet to find any concrete studies (recent studies, I might add) that support this claim. Seeing how this document is published by the NDCRC, do drug courts actually follow these guidelines?

More importantly, does anyone know where I can find more information regarding the Subject Title?

j

[cdwjava]

You may have to narrow your criteria ... what state's drug courts are you referring to? What might be a recommended policy or practice does not make it gospel in any particular state. It might even vary by court in some states.

[PTPD22]

The reason you find such discrepancy is because all the research you are reviewing are based on surveys and anecdotal evidence, not true scientifically valid research. There really is no scientifically valid research studies on this topic. The paper you quote even confirms this:

Although there are no scientific cannabinoid elimination studies on chronic users using non-instrumented testing devices,...

The reason survey research like this varies so widely is because the surveyors can only go by what the surveyees (is that a real word?) admit to. And, especially about topics like illegal drug use, it is a given that some percentage of people will lie. So, for example, when a percentage of people in the survey say, "Oh, I haven't smoked weed in the last 35 days," a subgroup of that percentage will actually have smoked more recently than that...and that skews the numbers when they still "piss hot." Also, there will be a percentage of responders who, while they have not DIRECTLY smoked weed in the past XX days, will still have been in environments where weed was being smoked and ingest it second-hand.

Anecdotally, I went through boot camp (back when dinosaurs roamed the earth) with a man who was on a marijuana waiver and was tested throughout boot camp. After 60 days, he was still "pissing hot"...and I am confident that he was not using during that time.

As different individuals metabolisms will work at somewhat different rates, nobody can predict exactly how long a given substance will clear from a specific person's system. The best that can be accomplished is a guideline or "average" metabolism rate...and that will vary from study to study.

To make a scientifically accurate study, the researchers would need a test group (large enough to be statistically viable) of people who smoked a controlled amount of marijuana, at a controlled frequency, for a controlled period of time. Then, stop all marijuana use among the group (with controls to ensure compliance!) while conducting regular testing of the residual marijuana levels in the subjects. The legal issues involved, let alone the ethical ones, of conducting such a study are prohibitive as the researchers would essentially have to create a large test group of chronic marijuana users!

[Kevin Bessant]

You have to keep in mind that every drug court will utilizes different procedures in their drug testing and monitoring, so you want to be specific as to what jurisdictions and or states probation/drug testing departments you are referring to.