Drug testing is no good

What right do businesses have to interfere with employee recreation? Whether it’s legal or illegal, they should not have the right to impose limitations, even if the time is spent using illicit substances.

The most common method of testing for illicit substances in an employee’s system is a urinalysis (colloquially known as a “piss test”). Like other drug tests, it doesn’t detect the test subject’s current level of drug intoxication, as it takes anywhere from six to eight hours after drug consumption for the substance(s) to be metabolized and excreted in urine. Instead, it detects usage of substances within the last few days, weeks, or even months.

Something else disconcerting about urinalysis is that it has been known to produce false positives. Drug testing methods can produce false positives because of certain foods and medicines. For instance, eating poppy seed muffins may cause a person to test positive for opiates. Nyquil may also produce false positives for opiates, methamphetamines and/or MDMA. Certain antibiotics may even cause one to falsely test positive for cocaine use.

Pro-drug testing zealots often fight for having drug testing in the workplace because it helps keep the cost of health insurance down for employees who choose not to use drugs. They argue that those who use drugs often have higher medical costs as a result of their substance use.

This idea proves false when considering the drugs that do cause health problems and physical addiction (ie: cocaine, amphetamines and opiates).

Usually, they do not show up in a urinalysis for more than two days after consumption, and in a saliva test for more than 12 hours, and therefore still will play a problem with employer drug testing since they will more than likely go undetected.

In all reality, drug testing only proves effective in catching those who use marijuana, which is less harmful than tobacco and alcohol. Unlike the two, it has not led to any recorded deaths, nor does it lead to physical dependency, brain damage and the decline of organs.

Now, marijuana should not be ignored all together, as long as one does it in his or her own recreational time and not while working.

All and all, current drug testing policies are wrong. If drug testing is allowed to be part of the workplace, it should be advanced to target those who are intoxicated at the time of testing and not those who choose to intoxicate themselves in their own private time.

by Nicholas Baker
The Clackamas Print

Dr. Kim – Tired of feminazis? Time for guys to take a stand

This column is just for you guys. It has recently come to my attention that in the process of developing equality for women, the fair and just treatment of men has somehow fallen to the wayside.

A man is considered a pig – an utter chauvinist – if he uses a woman for sex or money, but women use men all the time for their own selfish personal benefit and no heads are turned. She is considered proactive, a pioneer of modern society.

When I was in the sixth grade, I sat behind this girl named Julie Reynolds in science class. One day, Julie’s pencil rolled off her desk and onto the floor. She didn’t drop it on purpose; it just fell. She promptly turned to the closest boy and said, “Tyson, will you pick up my pencil for me?”

I watched in amazement as Tyson picked up the pencil.

What had just happened? Julie was much closer to the pencil than Tyson was; she could have easily picked it up herself. In the same hand, Tyson could have just as easily told Julie to get bent and pick up her own damn pencil.

This was my first experience with man-abuse.

When it comes down to it, it’s not a matter of gender at all. Women don’t force men to do inane favors for them at gunpoint. If a man chooses to sell himself out for a coquettish “thank you,” that’s his own ignorant fault. A weak bitch is a weak bitch, be it male or female.

The reason people find fault with the way men use women is that it’s scandalous. Using women for sex and money reflects badly on both sexes, not to mention that it’s an incredibly lazy way to be resourceful. At least when women use, their greedy actions reflect creativity and insight.

Things have gone too far. It’s time for you guys to take a stand.

Men are under the false assumption that women hold all the cards when it comes to sexual power. This is an illusion. She looks like she’s holding a full house, but she’s bluffing. Confidence is a state of mind – not a right of passage.

While you boys were so busy trying to take our pants off, you failed to realize that you weren’t wearing them in the relationship. Not only have women succeeded in shattering the glass ceiling; we’ve also managed to demolish the male ego.

You don’t have to have vagina-envy anymore, manly mates. STAND UP! Man-abuse is rampant, and the double-standards have got to be stopped.

The most devastating part about this tragic development in history is that the man brings it on himself. Fellows, I encourage you to take action immediately. Not only must you stop abiding to our petty, demeaning commands, but you should also adopt the female way of attaining dominant rank in the exchange.

The next time you have one of your female friends over, ask her to take your garbage out before she leaves, and see what happens. If this works, then call her next week and tell her to clean your room for you. You may also want to recruit your more burly lady pals to do some yard work for you.

Don’t be a victim to yourself any longer. Just say no to man-abuse.

Disclaimer: Dr. Kim is not a real doctor, nor has she ever been. She’s working on it, though.

To read more of “Dr. Kim,” go to askejean.com and click on the “Top Campus Sex Columnists.”

Hilton in jail

A 23-day stay at the “cross-bar hotel” is what billion-dollar princess Paris Hilton has earned herself from her most recent screw-up.

Earlier this month, the hotel heiress broke the terms of her probation by driving with a suspended license. Along with that, she is also dealing with an ongoing libel and slander suit against her from actress Zeta Graff.

There has been some relief in the fact that Hilton’s sentence was recently reduced from its original 45 days to just 23. But though it is an improvement, I believe it is still too harsh a punishment.

If it was being done to teach her a lesson, it would be completely different. However, in the current situation, I feel that the judge is just trying to make an example out of sweet Paris. I think the courts should just let it go, because a 23-day stay in lock-up for a star such as Hilton is nowhere near what everyone else would experience in jail. She will have her own cell, eat her own food and wear her own clothes.

All that is being taken away from her is her outside life, and no one can be sure that she will even have to stay for the entire 23 days – I am sure that she will get good-behavior brownie points.

The facts are simple: why should she be punished … if she is not really being punished?

by Jesse Dees
The Clackamas Print