Drug Tests: Products to Defraud Drug Use Screening Tests Are
Widely Available (17-MAY-05, GAO-05-653T).
This testimony discusses the ease with which the public can
obtain products that are marketed, designed, and sold to defraud
urine drug use screening tests such as those administered in the
Federal Workplace Drug Testing Program. For purposes of this
testimony, these products will be referred to as masking products
and ways in which some businesses peddle them on the Internet
will be discussed. Masking products fall into one of four
categories: (1) dilution substances that are added to a urine
specimen at the time it is collected or are ingested before an
individual submits a urine specimen; (2) cleansing substances
that detoxify or cleanse the urine and are ingested prior to the
time that an individual submits a urine specimen; (3) adulterants
that are used to destroy or alter the chemical make-up of drugs
and are added to a urine specimen at the time that it is provided
for testing; and (4) synthetic or drug-free urine that is
substituted in place of an individual's specimen and provided for
testing. This testimony today summarizes our findings.
-------------------------Indexing Terms-------------------------
REPORTNUM: GAO-05-653T
ACCNO: A24257
TITLE: Drug Tests: Products to Defraud Drug Use Screening Tests
Are Widely Available
DATE: 05/17/2005
SUBJECT: Controlled substances
Drug abuse
Drug testing
Drugs
Fraud
Internet
Law enforcement
Sales
Web sites
Drug Free Federal Workplace Program
******************************************************************
** This file contains an ASCII representation of the text of a **
** GAO Product. **
** **
** No attempt has been made to display graphic images, although **
** figure captions are reproduced. Tables are included, but **
** may not resemble those in the printed version. **
** **
** Please see the PDF (Portable Document Format) file, when **
** available, for a complete electronic file of the printed **
** document's contents. **
** **
******************************************************************
GAO-05-653T
United States Government Accountability Office
GAO Testimony
Before the Chairman, Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations,
Committee on Energy and Commerce, House of Representatives
For Release on Delivery Expected at 9:30 a.m. EDT Tuesday, May 17, 2005
DRUG TESTS
Products to Defraud Drug Use Screening Tests Are Widely Available
Statement of Robert J. Cramer, Managing Director Office of Special
Investigations
GAO-05-653T
This is a work of the U.S. government and is not subject to copyright
protection in the United States. It may be reproduced and distributed in
its entirety without further permission from GAO. However, because this
work may contain copyrighted images or other material, permission from the
copyright holder may be necessary if you wish to reproduce this material
separately.
Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee:
I am pleased to appear before you today to discuss the ease with which the
public can obtain products that are marketed, designed, and sold to
defraud urine drug use screening tests such as those administered in the
Federal Workplace Drug Testing Program.1 For purposes of my testimony, I
will refer to these products as masking products and will discuss ways in
which some businesses peddle them on the Internet. Masking products fall
into one of four categories: (1) dilution substances that are added to a
urine specimen at the time it is collected or are ingested before an
individual submits a urine specimen; (2) cleansing substances that
detoxify or cleanse the urine and are ingested prior to the time that an
individual submits a urine specimen; (3) adulterants that are used to
destroy or alter the chemical make-up of drugs and are added to a urine
specimen at the time that it is provided for testing; and (4) synthetic or
drug-free urine that is substituted in place of an individual's specimen
and provided for testing. My testimony today summarizes our findings.
We began our work by searching the Internet to obtain an overview of the
array of products available to mask drug use and located several Web sites
that tout products that are used to mask the presence of illegal drugs
when a urine drug test is administered. Then one of our agents, posing as
a federal employee in a sensitive position who uses marijuana and cocaine
and was looking for products that would allow him to pass an impending
drug test, placed telephone calls to businesses we identified in our
Internet search and purchased drug masking products from them. Through our
1 Drug tests can be performed on urine, saliva, perspiration, hair, and
blood. Currently, the federal government relies solely on urine drug
tests, which have a high degree of accuracy, low costs, and relatively
unobtrusive method of collection.
Internet search, we also identified and visited a retail store in the
Washington, D.C. metropolitan area that sells these products.
Additionally, we interviewed officials at the Substance Abuse and Mental
Health Services Administration (SAMSHA) of the Department of Health and
Human Services (HHS) to obtain information on the operation of the Federal
Drug Testing Program and the types of products or methods that are used by
individuals to deceive drug tests. Finally, we obtained information from
the Department of Justice (DOJ) and the Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) and
about federal laws relating to the sale of masking products and researched
state laws on this issue. We conducted our investigation from August 2004
through March 2005 in accordance with quality standards for investigations
set forth by the President's Council on Integrity and Efficiency. We are
referring the results of our investigation to appropriate law enforcement
authorities and thus are not naming the sources from which our purchases
were made.
In summary, we found that products to defraud drug tests are easily
obtained. They are brazenly marketed on Web sites by vendors who boast of
periodically reformulating their products so that they will not be
detected in the drug test process. In addition to an array of products
designed to dilute, cleanse, or substitute urine specimens submitted to
testers by drug users, approximately 400 different products are available
to adulterate urine samples. The sheer number of these products, and the
ease with which they are marketed and distributed through the Internet,
present formidable obstacles to the integrity of the drug testing process.
The sales representatives of the businesses we contacted assured our
investigator that the products they sold would enable him to pass an
impending drug test despite his
purported use of marijuana and cocaine. While all of the businesses
offered products designed to defraud drug tests, the sales representatives
recommended different types of masking products based on how frequently
our investigator purportedly used drugs, whether he was subjected to drug
tests that are announced or conducted randomly, and whether testing
administrators closely monitored the collection of urine specimens. When
our investigator said that he occasionally used marijuana and cocaine, the
representatives recommended he purchase herbal supplements and minerals to
be taken orally prior to the drug test. According to the sales
representatives, these products act as cleansers or detoxifiers. When our
investigator reported that he used marijuana and cocaine on a daily basis
and that he was subjected to random drug tests, they recommended that, if
he would not be closely monitored when he provided a specimen, he purchase
synthetic urine or adulterants that are added to a urine specimen. The
prices of the products that the sales representatives recommended ranged
from about $30 to $79.
Currently, there are a variety of laws related to the sale of drug masking
products. Under federal law, if such products are determined to be "drug
paraphernalia," an individual may be prosecuted for selling them pursuant
to 21 U.S.C. S: 863. 2 However, we have not found any reported federal
cases in which individuals have been prosecuted for such sales. In
contrast, some states specifically prohibit the manufacture, marketing, or
distribution of drug masking products. For example, New Jersey, Florida,
and Kentucky broadly outlaw the sale of any product designed to defraud or
falsify a drug screening
2 Drug paraphernalia is defined, among other things, as any equipment,
product or material...primarily intended or designed for use in ...
concealing ... a controlled substance. 21 U.S.C. S: 863.
test.3 In some states, such as Louisiana and Texas, it is illegal for an
individual to knowingly or intentionally deliver or manufacture substances
designed to falsify or alter drug test results.4 Additionally, at least
nine other states (Arkansas, Illinois, Maryland, Nebraska, North Carolina,
Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, South Carolina and Virginia)5 have outlawed the
sale of urine or adulterants for the purpose of passing drug tests. Of the
nine states, only one-South Carolina-has prosecuted at least two
individuals for marketing and selling masking products: one who sold urine
substitution kits over the Internet6 and another who advertised that his
store carried products that are used to pass drug tests by cleansing the
system.7 Also, of the nine states, Illinois and Kentucky have made the
offense punishable as a felony; South Carolina and North Carolina have
made a second offense punishable as a felony; and it is a misdemeanor
offense in the remaining states.
Background
Pursuant to Executive Order 12564, dated September 15, 1986, the federal
government established the Federal Workplace Drug Testing Program. It is
administered by SAMHSA for the purpose of preventing and deterring the use
of illicit drugs in the federal workplace, and to ensure that as the
federal government maintains employee productivity. In 2004, SAMHSA
revised the Mandatory Guidelines for Federal Workplace
3 N.J. Stat. Ann. S: 2 C:36-10 (West 2004); Fla. Stat. Ann. S: 817.565
(West 2000); and Ky. Rev. Stat. Ann. S:
516.108 (Michie 1999 & Supp. 2004).
4 La. Rev. Stat. Ann. S:14:133.3 (West 2004) and Tex. Health and Safety
Code Ann. S: 481.133 (Vernon 2003).
5 Ark. Code Ann. S: 5-60-201 (Michie 2003);; 720 Ill. Comp. Stat. S:
5/17-28 (WESTLAW through 2004
legislation); Md. Code Ann., Crim. Law S: 10-111 (2003); Neb. Rev. Stat.
S: 48-1908 (2002); N.C. Gen. Stat. S:
14-401.20 (2003); Okla. Stat. Ann. Tit. 63, S: 7002 (2005); 18 Pa. Cons.
Stat. Ann. S: 7509 (West 2000); S.C.
Code Ann. S: 16-13-470 (Law. Co-op. 2003); and Va. Code Ann. S: 18.2-251.4
(Michie 2004).
6 State v. Curtis, 591 S.E.2d 600.
7 State v. Rothchild, 569 S.E.2d 346.
Drug Testing Programs to require that specimen validity tests be conducted
on all urine specimens collected.8 Noting that there has been a recent
increase in the number of chemical adulterants that are marketed on the
Internet and in certain magazines, SAMSHA officials stated that validity
tests are intended to produce accurate, reliable, and correctly
interpreted test results and to decrease or eliminate opportunities to
defeat drug tests. According to SAMHSA, approximately 400 different
products are available to adulterate urine samples, and companies that
market masking substances periodically offer new formulations of their
products to avoid detection.
Internet Businesses Tout Success of Masking Products
To determine how businesses market drug masking products on the Internet,
our investigator conducted an Internet search using the words "pass drug
test." He quickly found many Web sites that brazenly tout products and
related information that enable users of illegal drugs to pass drug tests.
For example, one Web site claimed that "passing a urine drug test has
never been easier," while another boasts that it offers a "variety of
detox products [that] will beat the drug test or you'll get 200% of your
purchase price back." Yet another site advises prospective customers that
its product formulas change approximately every 6 to 9 months to stay
ahead of new validity tests performed by drug testing laboratories. These
Web sites offer a full array of drug masking products.
8 Initial validity screening of a urine specimen includes tests for color,
odor, creatinine level, specific gravity, and pH level. When these test
results do not fall within an acceptable range, more comprehensive testing
is undertaken to assess the general validity of the specimen and confirm
the presence of adulterants such as oxidants, nitrites, glutaraldehyde,
chromate, and surfactant.
Additionally, our investigator found some Web sites that provide an
interactive format for prospective customers to find out which products
best meet their individual needs. For example, one Web site provides a
question and answer format for prospective customers and then recommends
certain products based on the responses. Among these questions were:
o How many times per week do you smoke or take other substances?
o Are you watched when providing the sample?
o Will you have at least an hour to prepare?
o Are you taking a Department of Transportation regulated test?
After a purchaser clicks on the most appropriate responses to these
questions, the site presents pictures and descriptions of recommended
products that are available for purchase. This Web site offers a
"one-price-fits-all" approach and charges $32 for each of its products. It
also provides a store locator that helps prospective customers find out
whether retail stores in their local area carry these products.
To further investigate how these businesses market drug masking products,
our investigator placed telephone calls to some of them. Posing as a
federal employee looking for ways to hide his purported cocaine and
marijuana use in an impending drug test, our agent asked the sales
representatives for each of these vendors for information on products that
would enable him to pass a drug test. While each vendor offered a number
of products, most of the sales representatives tailored the particular
type of masking product they recommended to information they elicited from
the investigator about his purported drug use. They asked, for example,
how often he used drugs and
when he had most recently used them. They also asked about testing
procedures, such as whether tests are conducted randomly or are announced
in advance, and whether individuals providing urine samples are closely
monitored.
When our agent described himself as a casual cocaine and marijuana user
who undergoes announced drug tests, sales representatives recommended that
he purchase cleansing products that are ingested orally prior to the test.
According to the vendors, these substances detoxify or cleanse the urine
if taken before a test is conducted. For example, one of the sales
representatives said to our investigator, "if you can stay clean for at
least two days, we have a detox drink that you would drink on the day of
the test. It will keep you clean for five hours." For $35,9 our
investigator purchased the "detox drink." After telling another sales
representative that he had used cocaine during the past week and had a
drug test scheduled the following week, the representative told him "...
the good news is we have a detox program. ... It's a four day program, and
basically if you do that, you'll be OK for the test." For $79, our
investigator purchased the "detox program," which came with a urine test
kit that a buyer can use at home to conduct a pre-test before submitting a
specimen for a drug test.
When our investigator told the sales representatives that he uses cocaine
and marijuana on a daily basis and undergoes random drug testing, they
recommended that he purchase either synthetic urine or adulterant
products. Recommending a synthetic urine product, a representative told
our investigator, "you won't have to be as careful with our product. But
you can still get away with it and people do get away with it." Our
investigator
9 For purposes of our testimony, we are providing the actual price of the
product, which does not include shipping and handling costs.
purchased the product for $32. Another representative told our
investigator that his company sells synthetic urine and that it is "better
suited for random situations because the urine is premixed in the bag,
sealed off, and irradiated so that it won't go bad." Our investigator paid
$49.95 for this product.
At the suggestion of two other sales representatives, our investigator
placed orders for two adulterants. For $29.95, he purchased one adulterant
that is designed for people who use drugs daily and are subject to random
drug testing. This product consists of two small vials containing liquids
that are added directly to the urine specimen before it is submitted for
drug testing. Additionally, he spent $32 for another adulterant that is
designed to be used at the drug test location. This product is a bag that
contains two chemicals: one chemical is supposed to destroy the drug
toxins and another purports to destroy traces of the first chemical.
According to the product instructions, a urine specimen should be poured
into the bag, mixed with the chemicals, and then poured into the specimen
cup.
Using the store locator function on one of the Web sites, we identified a
store in the Washington, D.C. area that sells drug masking products.
Posing as someone needing information on products that would ensure
passing an impending drug test, we visited the store and observed a
variety of masking products displayed for sale. The owner of the store
told us that he has sold masking products for the past 11 years, and that
on some days he sells up to 4 detox products. Additionally, he told us
that he has repeat customers. For one of his customers, he special orders
certain products. While the store also carries synthetic urine, the owner
advised us that the detox drinks are more popular and sell better.
Laws Regarding the Sale of Drug Masking Products Vary
Under federal law, it may be illegal to sell drug masking products if the
products are determined to be "drug paraphernalia." Specifically, under
federal law, it is unlawful for any person to sell drug paraphernalia,
which is defined as any equipment, product, or material... primarily
intended or designed for use in ... concealing ... a controlled
10
substance. The following factors may be taken into consideration in
determining whether an item constitutes drug paraphernalia, including the
instructions provided with the item concerning its use; descriptive
materials accompanying the item which explain or depict its use; national
or local advertising concerning its use; the manner in which the item is
displayed for sale; and the existence and scope of legitimate uses of the
item.11 However, officials from DOJ and DEA advised us that there have not
been any federal cases in which an individual has been prosecuted for
selling drug masking products under this statute and our independent
research of federal case law databases did not find any.
In contrast, some states have statutes that specifically prohibit the
manufacture or distribution of drug masking products. For example, a New
Jersey statute specifically prohibits individuals from manufacturing,
selling, or giving "... any instrument, tool, device, or substance
adapted, designed or commonly used to defraud the administration of a drug
test."12 Under the New Jersey statute, a person may be prosecuted if he or
she submits a substance that purports to be from a person other than its
actual source or
10 21 U.S.C. S: 863. 11 21 U.S.C. S: 863(e).
otherwise engages in conduct intended to produce a false or misleading
outcome of a
13
drug test. Similarly, in Florida and Kentucky, it is illegal to
manufacture, market, or distribute products intended to defraud any
lawfully administered urine test designed to
14
detect the presence of controlled substances. In some states, such as
Louisiana and Texas, it is illegal for an individual to knowingly or
intentionally deliver or manufacture
15
substances designed to falsify or alter drug test results.
In some other states, laws relating to drug masking practices are
narrower. For example, in Nebraska it is illegal to provide bodily fluids
for the purpose of altering the results of tests to determine the presence
of drugs. In some states, such as Pennsylvania and Virginia, it is illegal
to sell drug-free urine, but there is no specific prohibition on the sale
of adulterants. In contrast, in some states such as South Carolina,
Arkansas, North Carolina, Oklahoma, Illinois, and Maryland, it is illegal
to sell urine or adulterants. However, of these states, only Illinois and
Oklahoma prohibit the sale of synthetic urine.
In our research of reported cases we found two cases in South Carolina in
which individuals have been prosecuted for the sale of masking products.
In one case that was decided in August 2002, the South Carolina Supreme
Court upheld a conviction for violation of a statute that prohibits the
possession of adulterants intended to defraud a drug test. In that case,
the vendor placed an advertisement in a magazine for a novelty store he
owned which read: "Taking a drug test? Want to cleanse your system? We
carry Readi-Clean, Carbo-Clean Plus, Quick Tabs, One Hour, Zydot, One Hour
Klear, Body
12 N.J. Stat. Ann S: 2 C:36-10(b).
13 N.J. Stat. Ann S: 2 C:36-10 (a).
14 Fla. Stat. Ann. S: 817.565 and Ky. Rev. Stat. Ann. S: 516.108.
15 La. Rev. Stat. Ann. S:14:133.3 and Tex. Health and Safety Code Ann. S:
481.133.
Flush." An undercover agent purchased an adulterant Zydot after the store
clerk assured him that the product would allow him to pass a drug test for
marijuana. In upholding the conviction, the Court relied on, among other
things, the advertisement the defendant placed rather than a determination
whether the product effectively masks drug use.16 Additionally, the South
Carolina Supreme Court upheld the conviction of another vendor
17
who sold urine substitution kits on the Internet. Included on the
defendant's Web site were claims that, "Our Complete Urine Test
Substitution Kits allow anyone, regardless of substance intake, to pass
any urinalysis within minutes."
Mr. Chairman, this concludes my statement. We will be pleased to respond
to any questions that you or the other members of the Subcommittee may
have.
Contacts
For further information regarding this testimony, please contact Robert J.
Cramer at (202) 512-7445 or Paul Desaulniers at (202) 512-7435.
(601266)
16 State v. Rothchild, 569 S.E.2d 346. 17 State v. Curtis, 591 S.E.2d 600.
GAO's Mission
Obtaining Copies of GAO Reports and Testimony
The Government Accountability Office, the audit, evaluation and
investigative arm of Congress, exists to support Congress in meeting its
constitutional responsibilities and to help improve the performance and
accountability of the federal government for the American people. GAO
examines the use of public funds; evaluates federal programs and policies;
and provides analyses, recommendations, and other assistance to help
Congress make informed oversight, policy, and funding decisions. GAO's
commitment to good government is reflected in its core values of
accountability, integrity, and reliability.
The fastest and easiest way to obtain copies of GAO documents at no cost
is through GAO's Web site (www.gao.gov). Each weekday, GAO posts newly
released reports, testimony, and correspondence on its Web site. To have
GAO e-mail you a list of newly posted products every afternoon, go to
www.gao.gov and select "Subscribe to Updates."
Order by Mail or Phone The first copy of each printed report is free.
Additional copies are $2 each. A check or money order should be made out
to the Superintendent of Documents. GAO also accepts VISA and Mastercard.
Orders for 100 or more copies mailed to a single address are discounted 25
percent. Orders should be sent to:
U.S. Government Accountability Office 441 G Street NW, Room LM Washington,
D.C. 20548
To order by Phone: Voice: (202) 512-6000 TDD: (202) 512-2537 Fax: (202)
512-6061
To Report Fraud, Contact:
Waste, and Abuse in Web site: www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm
E-mail: [email protected] Programs Automated answering system: (800)
424-5454 or (202) 512-7470
Gloria Jarmon, Managing Director, [email protected] (202)
512-4400Congressional U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street
NW, Room 7125 Relations Washington, D.C. 20548
Public Affairs Paul Anderson, Managing Director, [email protected] (202)
512-4800 U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7149
Washington, D.C. 20548
PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER
*** End of document. ***