| |||||||
| FAQ | Gaming | VB Image Host | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read |
| | LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
| | #1 |
| New Member Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 21
Grams: 1,098.50 Groans: 0
Groaned at 0 Times in 0 Posts
Thanks: 6
Thanked 4 Times in 4 Posts
| Oh crap... I dunno where to start. Long story short, I took a test last Saturday with Quick Fix ver 4.0 (I purchased it and used it the same day so it wasn't sitting around for a while). Anyways, I used the heat pack as advised in the instructions and the temp was ok for the sample (92) so I thought I was good to go since the testing place didn't think anything of the sample when I brought it out of the bathroom. They had me sign the paperwork and the sticker that goes over your sample. I also told them I take no vitamins and no prescription drugs. So I thought everything was set.... Well, my (former) new employer called today to tell me they got the results back and the lab said it was "synthetic urine". Basically, I lost my new job after 1 day and was just wondering what (if anything) I did wrong and are labs figuring out how to identify the 4.0 sample? I ask because the test site noted the temp and sample color looked fine (on the carbon copy paper they gave me). Any help would be appreciated because this is the first time I used QF 4.0 successfully and was pretty surprised when they told me I failed after reading so many success stories here. Any tips or similar experiences? Or was I just unlucky by going to the wrong lab? Also, I dunno if this will help, but the test was a non-dot test (5 panel) tested by Metrolab Legacy Last edited by bluefloor : 08-05-2008 at 06:31 PM. Reason: Added more info |
| | |
| Marijuana.com Sponsor | |
Advertisement | |
| | #2 |
| Sr. Member Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 684
Grams: 5,760.04 Groans: 20
Groaned at 0 Times in 0 Posts
Thanks: 31
Thanked 113 Times in 72 Posts
| Do you still have the box that the QF bottle came in, and its instructions sheet? If so, look on the instructions sheet and see what batch number you have. Last edited by lew scannon : 08-05-2008 at 11:02 PM. |
| | |
| | #3 |
| Super Moderator ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 6,344
Grams: 41,342.03 Groans: 15
Groaned at 29 Times in 24 Posts
Thanks: 686
Thanked 1,545 Times in 957 Posts
| I don't understand why they would write that the temp and color were fine. We don't note pertinent negatives, just anomolies. If the temp was too warm, for example, we note that in the remarks box then collect a second specimen. If the specimen smelled peculiar, for example. But to actually write that the urine was normal isn't a normal thing to do. |
| | |
| The Following User Says Thank You to Sec For This Useful Post: | jeffman_53 (08-10-2008) |
| | #4 |
| New Member Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 8
Grams: 344.95 Groans: 0
Groaned at 0 Times in 0 Posts
Thanks: 1
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
| Please help i have a test tomorrow and a was planning on using Quick Fix but this story makes me very nervous! Should i go with the dilution method instead? I was a heavy smoker but have been off it for 6 days! Very nervous now and don't know what to do! HELP! |
| | |
| | #5 |
| Banned Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 157
Grams: 1,014.40 Groans: 2
Groaned at 1 Time in 1 Post
Thanks: 80
Thanked 44 Times in 38 Posts
| Maybe that is why they are releasing a new formula. http://www.marijuana.com/urine-testi...ula-4-2-a.html Do you have any input on this Lew? |
| | |
| The Following User Says Thank You to JuanMoreTime For This Useful Post: | jeffman_53 (08-10-2008) |
| Marijuana.com Sponsor | |
Advertisement | |
| | #6 |
| New Member Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 7
Grams: 320.90 Groans: 0
Groaned at 0 Times in 0 Posts
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
| Wow, that is awful that you failed. I'm going to have to take a drug test in a couple of weeks and I was trying to decide what urine to buy. It definitely won't be that one. Please post back and let us know if you find out why this happened. |
| | |
| | #7 | |
| New Member Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 21
Grams: 1,098.50 Groans: 0
Groaned at 0 Times in 0 Posts
Thanks: 6
Thanked 4 Times in 4 Posts
| Quote:
Also, the notes on the paper were kind of hard to read because I got the bottom copy and they didn't press hard when they filled out the remarks section. It basically mentioned the pee was in temp range and normal color. I will give QF another try when I get a new job (hopefully soon). | |
| | |
| | #8 |
| Sr. Member Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 684
Grams: 5,760.04 Groans: 20
Groaned at 0 Times in 0 Posts
Thanks: 31
Thanked 113 Times in 72 Posts
| Blue, yes its entirely possible the batch was bad, but without having the batch number in hand, Its likely we'll never know. ![]() On your next purchase of the QF, make sure you hang on to that instructions sheet and note the batch number. Remember, for peace of mind you can always test your new QF batch at home with validity test strips to make sure the creatinine, pH, and SG are all satisfactory. You can find these test strips cheap by doing a search for drug adulteration test kits on google.com. |
| | |
| The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to lew scannon For This Useful Post: |
| | #9 | |
| Sr. Member Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 684
Grams: 5,760.04 Groans: 20
Groaned at 0 Times in 0 Posts
Thanks: 31
Thanked 113 Times in 72 Posts
| Quote:
I fully expect the QF 4.2 to supersede the 4.0 completely before the dawn of the new decade. The QF 4.0, a formulation into its fifth year as this is being written, is showing its age. Theres no denying though that the QF 4.0 had a great run. I was around "way back" when QF 3.0 was the formula. Looking back in retrospect, the 3.0 didn't enjoy such a lenghty run like its 4.0 successor. Last edited by lew scannon : 08-06-2008 at 04:50 AM. | |
| | |
| The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to lew scannon For This Useful Post: |
| | #10 |
| New Member Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 21
Grams: 1,098.50 Groans: 0
Groaned at 0 Times in 0 Posts
Thanks: 6
Thanked 4 Times in 4 Posts
| I purchased a new box of 4.0 with batch number ending in 06. Hopefully I will be good to go next time I test. As for the people who are hesitant of using QF, I wasn't trying to scare anybody or try to get you to use a different product. From what I have read (over the 2 years here as a member), QF is definitely the way to go. I still have faith in the product, but was just surprised the lab detected it. I didn't know if some labs tested differently or had a special way of figuring out if it's synthetic. I was expecting it to be clean, especially since it was the most basic drug test you can get for pre-employment (5 panel). |
| | |
| Marijuana.com Sponsor | |
Advertisement | |