What's new
  • Please note members who been with us for more than 10 years have been upgraded to "Veteran" status and will receive exclusive benefits. If you wish to find out more about this or support IcMag and get same benefits, check this thread here.
  • Important notice: ICMag's T.O.U. has been updated. Please review it here. For your convenience, it is also available in the main forum menu, under 'Quick Links"!

Concerns raised about first device set to be approved for roadside drug detection

Rider420

Well-known member
Concerns raised about first device set to be approved for roadside drug detection

https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/concerns-raised-about-first-device-set-to-be-approved-for-roadside-drug-detection-1.4047206


Published Thursday, August 9, 2018 10:00PM EDT
OTTAWA – The first device set to be approved by the federal government for roadside saliva tests to determine marijuana impairment isn’t suited for cold weather, and has been found to give “fairly large proportions of false-positive or false-negative results.”

Last month Justice Minister Jody Wilson-Raybould published a notice of intention to approve the Dräger DrugTest 5000, and list it as “approved drug screening equipment” for law enforcement to use at the roadside to test for both THC and cocaine.

However, CTV News has found concerns about the efficacy and efficiency of the device.

“It’s inevitable that we’re going to see constitutional challenges as soon as this device hits the roads. This is something that is a significant departure from what the Supreme Court of Canada has authorized, and what police has been doing thus far,” said Kyla Lee, a criminal lawyer focused on roadside impairment testing.

A study published earlier this year in the Journal of Analytical Toxicology examining the use of the device in Norway shows that the Dräger DrugTest 5000 “did not absolutely correctly identify DUID (driving under the influence of drugs) offenders due to fairly large proportions of false-positive or false-negative results compared to drug concentrations in blood.”

The study included over 300 Norwegian drivers who were tested for impairment using both the oral device as well as a blood sample. It found that the proportion of false-positive results generated by the device compared to the finding of a blood sample was 14.5 per cent for cannabis, and 87.1 per cent for cocaine.

As well, compared to drivers whose blood samples showed their THC levels were above the legal limit, 13.5 per cent of drivers showed false-negatives, meaning the THC in their system was not detected by the oral screen.


The study’s authors said that the Norwegian Mobile Police— who have been using the device since 2015— claim it was “still a valuable tool in identifying possible DUID offenders, resulting in more than doubling the number of apprehended DUID offenders.”

The device has also been used in Australia, where police admitted in 2016 that it gave accurate results only about two thirds of the time.

Canadian climate too cold?

There are also questions about the suitability of the Dräger DrugTest 5000 for the Canadian climate, with the device’s operating temperature ranging between four and 40 degrees Celsius.

“A lot of Canada most of the year is below those temperatures, and so you’re going to see tests either taken in unreliable circumstances, or a device that’s completely unworkable for the police a good majority of the year,” Lee said.

The tests have also been found to be time consuming, requiring the police officer to orally swab the driver for up to four minutes, and it can take as long as ten minutes to test the sample.

The test also requires there not be any food or drink in the subject’s mouth for 10 minutes prior to taking the test. All told, Lee estimates each test will take up to half an hour to complete on the roadside, which she said is 10 times as long as a breathalyzer test for alcohol detection.

"What you're going to be doing is seeing people detained for lengthy periods of time at the roadside with no opportunity to contact lawyers,” said Lee.

In a statement to CTV News, Managing Director of Dräger Canada Rob Clark said the company is “proud” to have its device considered for approved use by Canadian law enforcement.

“Dräger has 60 years of experience in roadside detection, and our technology has been consistently chosen by law enforcement around the world who trust its track record of reliability and accuracy,” he said, adding that the company is looking forward to working closely with Canadian police officers to help made roads safer.

The authorization to use these kinds of devices came as part of Bill C-46, the impaired driving legislation that passed along Bill C-45, the Cannabis Act, which sets up the legal regime for recreational marijuana.

Bill C-46 changed impaired driving laws to give police new powers to conduct roadside intoxication tests, including oral fluid drug tests, and makes it illegal to drive within two hours of being over the legal limit.

The bill specifically created three new criminal offences related to driving with blood concentration between two and five nanograms of THC—the primary psychoactive ingredient in cannabis—per milliliter of blood within two hours of driving.

Throughout the parliamentary study of the legislation, a dominating question was the efficacy of determining cannabis impairment. Experts have said that determining what amount is required to actually constitute impairment, and how long TCH can linger in a person’s system largely depends on the individual and their tolerance.

Speaking to these testing devices generally, criminal defence lawyer Solomon Friedman told CTV News that the science is “unproven,” and it’s sparking concern that the devices are being rushed out without enough of an opportunity to test their reliability, given the concerns being raised in other jurisdictions.

“The legislation assumes as fact that the results that are obtained from these machines are accurate, so the burden of proof is going to rest very squarely on the individual accused and their council to overturn the scientific results of these machines,” said Friedman.

Positive test the first step

In the July 19 notice from Wilson-Raybould, it states that a positive result obtained by the Dräger device “would be a strong indication of recent use.” If the oral fluid sample tests positive, it would provide the grounds, combined with an officer’s other observations, to proceed further and demand a formal drug recognition evaluation, or a blood sample.

Under Bill C-46, officers need reasonable suspicion that there are drugs in a driver’s system before pulling them over and testing them, though if the person fails the roadside oral test, the person will be arrested and taken in for additional testing.

Failing an oral roadside test is not a criminal offence, nor can the results be used in court. A blood test is required to determine legal impairment.

The notice for Dräger DrugTest’s approval comes after toxicologists and traffic safety experts on the Drugs and Driving Committee of the Canadian Society of Forensic Science—an independent adviser to the Justice Department— studied the device.

Those interested have a 30-day window from the notice’s posting to contact the Justice Department with their feedback.

In a statement to CTV News, Scott Bardsley, spokesperson for Public Safety Minister Ralph Goodale, said Public Safety Canada and the RCMP conducted a pilot project between December 2016 and March 2017 with several law enforcement agencies across Canada to test officers’ ability to use roadside testing devices under different weather conditions.

The pilot used two oral screening devices, though this specific device was not one of them.

The federal government is providing $81 million for provinces and territories to train officers and purchase screening devices, though it won’t be mandatory for agencies to use the drug detection device.

As of May, the Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police told The Canadian Press that just 773 officers across the country have received specialized drug recognition training.

StatsCan: 4.6M people drive high

A new statistics Canada survey released Thursday shows that 14 per cent of cannabis users with a driver’s license have gotten behind the wheel within two hours of using the drug.

About 1.4 million Canadians reported that they had been a passenger in a vehicle driven by someone who had consumed cannabis within the last two hours.

The survey also reported that in the second quarter of 2018, in which the results were harvested, 4.6 million Canadians aged 15 or older reported using cannabis in the three months prior.

MADD Canada’s Steve Sullivan told CTV News that he expects the rate of drug-impaired driving will decrease once the drug-testing devices are in use.

It is possible additional devices could be approved by the federal government, giving police agencies the choice in which they decide to employ, if they elect to add saliva tests to their roadside arsenal at all.

The notice for approval explicitly states that the use of the Dräger device will not be mandatory.

Police already enforce drug-impaired driving laws using Standard Field Sobriety Testing, which does not require these devices.

Recreational marijuana becomes legal in Canada on Oct. 17.

What a joke 3 in 20 people tested for cannabis will test positive even if they have never smoked in their lives. 2 in 20 people will test negative even when they are as stoned as you can get.

The test alone will never stand up in court!

BTW don't expect to see any of these machines unless you live in a city and even then only a few impaired driving task forces will have these units. This is mere propaganda to make anti cannabis narcs less fearful of this brave new world.
 

potty1

Active member
in the uk these tests are just like the alcohol breathalizers.
not admisable in court but used to nick you at the roadside then back to the station for blood analysis.
 
T

Teddybrae

in the uk these tests are just like the alcohol breathalizers.
not admisable in court but used to nick you at the roadside then back to the station for blood analysis.


Same here in Oz.


acquaintances of mine have rendered the swab ineffective with a mouthful of sweets/lollies/candy. I carry some 'quikeze' ('tums' in the US) in the console of my car for the same reason. the Hemp Embassy here makes an oral spray antidote.


and here "the Lick" is used not just in the city but also in the countryside where there is a lot of ice use.
 
S

sativaking

Who else thinks this is stupid...u are still gonna test positive 2 days after.
 

Buddha1

Member
Veteran
Only problem with fighting it 100%...is it all cost you joe or Josephine private citizen, loads and loads of cash... lawyers aren't cheap.

Peace...B
 
M

moose eater

For years the early EMIT urine tests were rife with false positives and negatives. The various authorities used them like crazy left, right and center anyway.

As someone else pointed out, just as the EMIT tests were used to justify a gas chromatograph confirmation on a urine sample, the newer saliva tests will be used to push a blood test.

The -real- down side will come in places with per se' laws re. THC in the blood, where actual impairment or intoxication doesn't matter, as ANY THC content in the bloodstream is regarded as the same as DUI/impairment.

Legalization won't immediately cure discrimination toward dope smokers or fear of them. But it might help to start the process that eventually leads there... I hope.
 

fatigues

Active member
Veteran
Only problem with fighting it 100%...is it all cost you joe or Josephine private citizen, loads and loads of cash... lawyers aren't cheap.

Unfortunately... all too true. And this won't just be for the lawyers. In the initial stages, much of the costs is going to be for the expert evidence necessary to expose the equipment and tests as inherently unreliable.

It's going to be several years of unpleasantness under the new laws. This was a deal with Prohibitionists and the very cautious that was necessary to make legalization politically palatable in its initial stages. Regrettable? Hell yes. Politically necessary? Unfortunately, also yes.

So until all this works its way out? Don't be stupid. This is going to require some changes in your behavior to exercise greater caution. Sucks, but there it is.

I appreciate that this is unwelcomed advice. Doesn't change the practicality of it though.
 

Buddha1

Member
Veteran
Only problem with fighting it 100%...is it all cost you joe or Josephine private citizen, loads and loads of cash... lawyers aren't cheap.

Peace...B


Unfortunately... all too true. And this won't just be for the lawyers. In the initial stages, much of the costs is going to be for the expert evidence necessary to expose the equipment and tests as inherently unreliable.

It's going to be several years of unpleasantness under the new laws. This was a deal with Prohibitionists and the very cautious that was necessary to make legalization politically palatable in its initial stages. Regrettable? Hell yes. Politically necessary? Unfortunately, also yes.

So until all this works its way out? Don't be stupid. This is going to require some changes in your behavior to exercise greater caution. Sucks, but there it is.

I appreciate that this is unwelcomed advice. Doesn't change the practicality of it though.

I am a long time Cannabis user...I smoked my 1st joint at age 13 and my 1st bag of weed was a "Lid"...both were back in the 70's. I just turned 60 years old and have been medically retired for 5 years. I don't have the money to fight either DUI...Cannabis or Alcohol.

I suggest to everyone of all ages to do as I've done for years... don't drive impaired, its easy, take cabs. Its a bit pricey...but a whole lot cheaper than a DUI. I stopped driving impaired(with drugs, weed, alcohol...everything) 10 years ago, after I seen the shit show my apprentice went through by getting a DUI. The device you pay to have installed in your car, that you pay to maintain and pay to remove once your done. The forced drug and alcohol counseling you have to attend with no excuse policy on being late or absent. A complete and total nightmare from every angle.

Just an overall bad year of complete inconvenience and total disruption of his life was enough for me to smarten up and change my ways about driving impaired on anything...period.

I suggest if you don't have the money to 100% fight it...its a simple process to avoid all the problems that come with DUI's...Take a $20 cab ride.
Leave the changing of the law challenges to those that can afford it and those stupid enough to drive while impaired(usually the same group).

You can drive impaired your entire life and not get busted, but it only takes that one time for you to be out thousands of $$...not to mention all the other bullshit that comes along with it.

Just my 2 cents...:tiphat:

Peace...B
 
Last edited:

home_piece

New member
You can drive impaired your entire life and not get busted, but it only takes that one time for you to be out thousands of $$...not to mention all the other bullshit that comes along with it.

Just my 2 cents...:tiphat:

Peace...B

You're missing the point that the new laws will have people showing as "impaired" days after any use
 

TheBlackman

Member
I am a long time Cannabis user...I smoked my 1st joint at age 13 and my 1st bag of weed was a "Lid"...both were back in the 70's. I just turned 60 years old and have been medically retired for 5 years. I don't have the money to fight either DUI...Cannabis or Alcohol.

I suggest to everyone of all ages to do as I've done for years... don't drive impaired, its easy, take cabs. Its a bit pricey...but a whole lot cheaper than a DUI. I stopped driving impaired(with drugs, weed, alcohol...everything) 10 years ago, after I seen the shit show my apprentice went through by getting a DUI. The device you pay to have installed in your car, that you pay to maintain and pay to remove once your done. The forced drug and alcohol counseling you have to attend with no excuse policy on being late or absent. A complete and total nightmare from every angle.

Just an overall bad year of complete inconvenience and total disruption of his life was enough for me to smarten up and change my ways about driving impaired on anything...period.

I suggest if you don't have the money to 100% fight it...its a simple process to avoid all the problems that come with DUI's...Take a $20 cab ride.
Leave the changing of the law challenges to those that can afford it and those stupid enough to drive while impaired(usually the same group).

You can drive impaired your entire life and not get busted, but it only takes that one time for you to be out thousands of $$...not to mention all the other bullshit that comes along with it.

Just my 2 cents...:tiphat:

Peace...B



yo,

where does one start with a post such as this,
first off let's roll with the cash to implement this foolishness,

unless your ballin' and making tons of disposable dough,
taking a cab everywhere makes no sense at all,
like Homer would say...D'oh,

I agree that drinkin' and drivin' is in no way ok,
but impairment by cannabis can change day by day,

as pointed out by others who know,
you don't have to be stoned to blow over,
to incur the process that is all for show,

the other thing about taking a cab to and fro,
many folks live rural so that solution won't work...
..unless you've got unlimited ca$h flow,

your example I do appreciate,
so don't take this post as throwin' shade or any hate,

just my ol mind does not see the reality of folks affording such luxuries,
most medical patients I know are on disability,

if your sound of body then I suggest one can,
hop on two wheels,
start pedaling but watch out for the man,

just like being inebriated on some wobbly pops some fine day,
drinking and bicycling will get your ass hauled away,

point being made in case it's over anyone's head,
the new laws are unjust,
tired at best,

but listen to some of the go along gang,
they'll say that it's best bang for the buck,
to have 'legal' kind,

do what you will,
but know the cost you'll pay,

so be a dead fish and go with flow,
your just a number anyways.
 

Limeygreen

Well-known member
Veteran
What I understood for the saliva swabs is that it really only tests you for the last 6-8 hours before the residual is gone from your mouth on average. If you're brushing your teeth, mouth wash etc then shouldn't you be ok as long as you're not smoking right before or during driving? Blood test is a different story, of course any regular user will like be over when tested.
 

Gmack

Member
I live a hour from the nearest cab company what do you suggest I do? I quit smoking for 33 days to pre employment drug test. Came back 16 nanograms. 8x the new legal limit. Are you suggesting I cab it everywhere or that I just give up the cannabis I need to get out of bed every day? These per say limits are bullshit and not based on any science relating to impairment. Strictly another liberal cannabis cash grab that will see more Canadians getting criminal convictions then ever. More Canadians will be seeing jail cells for cannabis related crimes after October then under and conservative government
 

Gmack

Member
What I understood for the saliva swabs is that it really only tests you for the last 6-8 hours before the residual is gone from your mouth on average. If you're brushing your teeth, mouth wash etc then shouldn't you be ok as long as you're not smoking right before or during driving? Blood test is a different story, of course any regular user will like be over when tested.

Seems the swabs are out and this new breathalyzer style contraption is in. Blow in to it and it analyzes your breath for residue. Be careful of mouthwash as most is alcohol based amd can register a false positive on a alcohol breathalyzer
 
M

moose eater

So an effective and safe oral acid-based 'cleanser' of sorts.

Even sugar-free mint chewing gums carry alcohol-based sugars in limited amount.

Seems to me that Anita Bryant the Florida orange growers may have been pushed into a money-making situation they may not have foreseen..

Until they restrict ingesting orange juice behind the wheel, anyway.
 

troutman

Seed Whore

ozzieAI

Well-known member
Veteran
this really is turning into a shit show worldwide...

by making the mere presence of THC the 'crime' combined with the very low level tolerance of testing and the unreliability of the actual testing itself leaves us very exposed...

as you can read from the link teddy posted of my thread in the Australian forum we are well down this road. people have been their own worst enemy here by helping the police identify false negatives and authorities then reducing the testing levels from 25ng down to 12ng and now here we are at 5ng....

people are testing positive up 36 hours AFTER consumption...

on a personal level i now use capsules for my day to day intake and only vape when i know i have at least a 24 hour window of no driving...

caps are good as they bypass leaving THC residue in your mouth therefore making swabs redundant...still won't pass a blood or urine test however...

in regards to the daeger test, i have from a reliable source ie a smoker that has access to a deager, he reports that a break of at least 18 hours is required to ensure a negative result from the machine...

good luck and stay safe....
 

Latest posts

Latest posts

Top