Cotinine test/screen

[hotreds]

Recently came across a job that required a tobacco screen for cotinine. Would cigar smoking cause one to fail this test? Any comments on this?

[Sauer Grapes]

According to Wikipedia it is generally detectable for up to a week depending on the nicotine exposure. It can enter the body through smoke or orally.

My guess is that you should abstain from cigars for a bit before they test.

[Ogre]

How far out is the test?? More then a few day, don't smoke anything until after the test. I have heard drinking allot of water helps as well.

[DaBear]

From the great Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cotinine

"Cotinine has an in vivo half-life of approximately 20 hours, and is typically detectable for several days (up to one week) after the use of tobacco. The level of cotinine in the blood is proportionate to the amount of exposure to tobacco smoke, so it is a valuable indicator of tobacco smoke exposure...Cotinine levels <10 ng/mL are considered to be consistent with no active smoking. Values of 10 ng/mL to 100 ng/mL are associated with light smoking or moderate passive exposure, and levels above 300 ng/mL are seen in heavy smokers - more than 20 cigarettes a day. In urine, values between 11 ng/mL and 30 ng/mL may be associated with light smoking or passive exposure, and levels in active smokers typically reach 500 ng/mL or more"

Sounds like it will give you a higher level. Not sure there's a pass/fail line on it. Seems like it would be used for healthcare pricing at the job if its one with benefits, otherwise I see no reason for them toe require one.

[GreekGodX]

I wonder if inhaling a cigarette vs not inhaling cigars plays a roll in the levels.

[Ogre]

Originally Posted by GreekGodX

I wonder if inhaling a cigarette vs not inhaling cigars plays a roll in the levels.

I think it would, just not to the same level. I always seem to inhale a little smoke while enjoying a fine cigar.

[Ogre]

Unfortunately Bear, allot of companies are going smoke free for all employees. A local hospital here wont hire any new employees that smoke.

[hotreds]

Originally Posted by Ogre

Unfortunately Bear, allot of companies are going smoke free for all employees. A local hospital here wont hire any new employees that smoke.

So they would consider an occasional cigar "smoking?"

[Ogre]

Originally Posted by hotreds

So they would consider an occasional cigar "smoking?"

Not sure. I know the insurance industry does. I would think smoking an occasional cigar would Not put you at risk. And if you were to get tagged, you had a cigar for a wedding, baby birth ETC. I don't know of any companies doing random cotinine test, even at that hospital. You may have to sign a paper saying you don't smoke.

[FUEL]

Originally Posted by Ogre

Unfortunately Bear, allot of companies are going smoke free for all employees. A local hospital here wont hire any new employees that smoke.

I know this is an old post but how the hell is that legal? Its been a few years since right out of college working in HR but the farthest I've seen is testing to see what insurance you would qualify for. I can't imagine a company refusing to hire someone because they herf.

[BlkDrew]

This gets my blood boiling. It just goes to show how we are losing rights every day, one at a time. I can understand for life insurance reasons like paying a higher premium. But for someone to not get hired or lose their job is rediculus

[DaBear]

Originally Posted by BlkDrew

This gets my blood boiling. It just goes to show how we are losing rights every day, one at a time. I can understand for life insurance reasons like paying a higher premium. But for someone to not get hired or lose their job is rediculus

[Ogre]

Originally Posted by BlkDrew

This gets my blood boiling. It just goes to show how we are losing rights every day, one at a time. I can understand for life insurance reasons like paying a higher premium. But for someone to not get hired or lose their job is rediculus

I agree, but companies claim thet get lower health insurance cost if all employees are nonsmokers. Also look at cigarette smokers who take "Smoke breaks" during work shifts, lost production.

[Subvet642]

Originally Posted by Ogre

I agree, but companies claim they get lower health insurance cost if all employees are nonsmokers. Also look at cigarette smokers who take "Smoke breaks" during work shifts, lost production.

Perhaps, but if I couldn't smoke, I'd throttle the life out of someone, so in my case, smoking decreases liability.

[Apoco]

Originally Posted by Ogre

I agree, but companies claim thet get lower health insurance cost if all employees are nonsmokers. Also look at cigarette smokers who take "Smoke breaks" during work shifts, lost production.

But do you regain that lost production due to increased productivity from nicotine? Not to mention the benefits of walking away from a task for 10 minutes and then coming back. A whole new set of eyes can lead to a [b]lot[/u] less wasted time.

I guess it is all how you look at it, though. I'd prefer to be effective than continually present. I take a 5-10 minute walk whenever I get stumped on how to do something at work (usually excel or access being a PITA ).

Either way, this is not something I'm happy to read. My hope is that this doesn't become common practice. I like my cigars, pipe, and hookah too much to give up tobacco =X
Posted via Mobile Device

[OLS]

Originally Posted by Apoco

But do you regain that lost production due to increased productivity from nicotine? Not to mention the benefits of walking away from a task for 10 minutes and then coming back. A whole new set of eyes can lead to a [b]lot[/u] less wasted time.

While I find your first postulation to be not only confusing but spurious, I agree wholeheartedly with the
second part. Taking a break and walking around helps clear the mind and open up new pathways to
reconcile difficult problems.

But from an employer's point of view, I can't and won't defend the smokers or the obese. IT IS sad that
a cigar smoker can't escape the trap they set to weed out "the smokers", but times are tight today,
employers can be EXTREMELY selective. Adapt or starve it would seem. No sense in defending smoking
as a RIGHT anymore, it's a death pact and a money drain in a time when the 99% can't waste money.

[OLS]

Originally Posted by BlkDrew

This gets my blood boiling. It just goes to show how we are losing rights every day, one at a time.

This is what happens when you reach "pariah status" in our modern world. You start to have a country
where the few understand their power and become the many just like that. You can teach your kids in
school, "Smoking is BAD" and feel good about it, but when they grow up, if they get militant about it it's
gonna backfire on you. It doesn't matter whether you think you are entitled to rights or not, once a thing
becomes thought of as BAD by a majority of people, you've just lost your perceived rights.
This is my main complaint with religion, non-believers become 'the smokers'.

This screen is a complete joke.. I'll stop there, because I don't want to get banned

[Jasonw560]

Alcohol and drug testing I can see, but this is Draconian.

And the insurance rates being lower. I call BS on that.

[OLS]

Originally Posted by Jasonw560

And the insurance rates being lower. I call BS on that.

Like a local Ambulance Chaser here says, "have you EVER seen insurance rates go down, even once?"
He was talking about tort reform and how the ICs all say that tort reform will cause insurance rates to
go down. We all know that wouldn't be the result of tort reform. And every time an IC lowers your
rates, it is because you have bought your employees a package with higher deductibles is usually all.