Marijuana.com

MonarchX

http://www.ndci.org/NDCIR%20VI.pdf

Check out pages 23 and 36.

Very good read with great statistics
I am not sure if it has been posted here before. Many people freak out about detection times. Yes, how fast your body gets rid of THC depends on your body, but on average even a chronic smoker would pass after 2 weeks.

I just wanted to say it because I see advice such as "I would never take a drug test unless I was at least 2 months clean". Those cases are extremely rare.

There are also many scary tables like this:

Cannabinoids (THC, Marijuana) Detection Time:
1 time only 5-8 days
2-4x per month 11-18 days
2-4x per week 23-35 days
5-6x per week 33-48 days
Daily 49-63 days

 

Sec

Do you have any idea who wrote that or why?

This report was quoting a website ipassedmydrugtestdotcomslashfaqslash detecttime

It was written as an advisory to drug courts and merely quoted this table as it is included in the website. There is no credence or research given to support this data. It is quoted merely to show the multitude of Q&A websites there are on drug testing.

You really should, as I have told you before, read completely through your information.

Here is another exerpt from that same article:

Quote:

The chemical in marijuana, THC, is absorbed by fatty tissues in various organs. Traces of THC can be detected by standard urine and blood tests for about 2 days up to 11 weeks depending on the person’s metabolism, how much they smoked and how long they smoked.

and another from the same article:

Quote:

THC (the active chemical in marijuana) is stored in the fat cells and therefore takes longer to fully clear the body than with any other common drug. This means that some parts of the body still retain THC even after a couple of months, rather than just the couple of days or weeks for water soluble drugs."

Try not to take what may seem like facts out of context and place them here.

__________________
Guidelines.
Search
http://www.marijuana.com/drug-test/index

MonarchX

Are you talking about the table only? I was referring to it as MISINFORMATION that can be found on some websites. I meant to discredit that table.

Or are you saying that statements about chronic users being able to be BELOW regular 50 cut off level after 2-3 weeks is also not credible?

I believe it would more beneficial to let people know what the detection times are on average, rather than saying 2 days to 11 weeks where some small % doesn't pass after 10 weeks.

I was only trying to help.

RNRDUDE

monarch

People who give false hope really irratates me.

Chronic smokers MAY (the key word is MAY, please don't overlook that very small word) break down the thc metabolites a little faster, but they have MUCH MUCH MUCH higher levels of THC in their system. Therefore it might take longer for a chronic smoker to fall below the cutoff level.

Please think before you post.

Sec

How is this discrediting the table? The entire article, not just the table is taken out of context. It is intended as a periodical guide for drug courts. It shows information that is floating on the internet, information from different studies, information from statistics from drug court, information from other sources. It is over 100 pages long. You have taken a couple of sentences and placed them here as a guide for detection time without even bothering to investigate or acknowledge where those times came from. Not just the table, but your sentences above the table as well.

The only thing this article (as a whole) is good for is for those who are testing for drug court can see from where the courts are taking their advice and protocol.

BTW, the table is closer to realistic detection times than anything else in that article, so discrediting the table also isn't helping.

 

MonarchX

Page 23 says otherwise.

"An extensive evaluation of marijuana elimination research is presented and cannabinoid detection window guidance is offered. Recent scientific literature indicates that it is uncommon for occasional marijuana smokers to test positive for cannabinoids in urine for longer than seven days using standard cutoff concentrations. Following smoking cessation, chronic smokers would not be expected to remain positive for longer than 21 days, even when using the 20 ng/mL cannabinoid cutoff. While longer detection times have been documented in research studies, these prolonged elimination findings represent uncommon occurrences and should not be used as exculpatory evidence in the majority of case adjudications."

And from the following paragraph "He has authored numerous scientific publications and monographs, has served on a variety clinical and technical advisory committees, teaches at the university, is involved in drug testing research, and serves as a consultant in toxicology-related matters."

Page 36 has a table/list of research done.

So, why is this so not credible?

MonarchX

Pages 23 and 36 FFS!

MonarchX

Not only that, but I personally test a semi-solid line after 12 days of quitting, and 3 idiots I know smoked a blunt and passed their military test 2 days later, as well as a girl (super chronic user) who had to do Pre-Trial Intervention tested negative after a few weeks. What I quoted backs up personal experience. Can't say that is valid for research due to biased sample (young people = faster metabolic rate). But you said the table is the closest to reality..49-63 days for chronic user? So, that means majority of chronic users fail their first court drug tests because they are only given 30 days to get clean. That means the entire probation program is worthless because most people don't have enough time to clean up even if they truly quit!

Sec

From page 38 - 39 of your same article. 6 our of 17 are still testing positive after 28 days. A little over 33%. That is not insignificant. They actually defined chronic as having over 5000 episodes of marijuana use.

What is evident is that studies are inconclusive at best. A huge factor is the age and lifestyle of the user. It is common knowledge that a 20 year old, 6' tall, 150 lb chronic user can test clean much, much faster than a 45 year old, 5'7", 210 lb chronic user. None of the studies take this data into account. Most clinical studies are done in prisons, where diet and exercise is somewhat regulated, or in college settings where users are young and in better shape than the average middle aged couch potato.

We have been reading thread after thread for years where people have documented their detection times. The young, 18 year old comes on here touting that he can smoke on Saturday night and test negative on Tuesday morning just by drinking 40 ounces of water. That is all well and good, but for the older, more sedentary job seeker, that advice will hurt much more than it helps.

Also, all the studies listed on page 36 are at least a decade old. Some used test devices & methods that are now discontinued because they are outdated. In addition, there aren't enough participants in the studies to make them truely scientific. They were each done for a different reason, the test data is not documented and the specific use of each participant is not defined.

Keep in mind that this paper is written for DRUG COURT. It is telling the courts that people who come in saying that they need 30 days to test negative is bogus. They are telling drug courts that pretty much everyone should test negative after a couple of weeks. While it helps the drug court with its punishment using an unrealistic time frame, it really isn't real in life. It isn't what we have seen here.

Don't get all defensive. You need to take what you read with a grain of salt and remember for whom it was written.

Also, if you change (edit) your original posts again after someone has responded to it, I will issue you an infraction. Not only is it rude, but you have changed either the topic of a discussion or the jist of your intended meaning after someone has refuted your information. You have done it in other threads and I have warned you not to. It is rude, and it promotes flaming. Don't do it again. You have no problem turboposting as is evidenced by your posting three posts in quick succession. Why then, do you feel the need to go back and edit a day old post?

MonarchX

Yes, they don't give much data about study participants and i can expect that most marijuana probation drug tests are taken by young adults (who are more likely to get caught) and that can skew the results in a particular direction. However, I think its still a bit too uninformative and vague to say that detection times are form 2 days to 11 weeks based on metabolic rate, quantity, and frequency of marijuana use. This is why I began to look into this stuff because my personal experiences with myself and friends differ from those who post here. The article gives insight on overall or general detection times for people who use marijuana (and it is not a secret that most of them are younger with higher metabolic rates). Using it a guide for detection times would discriminate against the minority of users, but be more precise. and realistic.

The original thread had a change. I added pages 23 and 36. Nothing else was taken out.