Now, I believe that my thread has real value because there are many common substances that we take that could result in a positive drug test as defined by the World Anti-Doping Agency. Not everyone is a medical expert and know what products contain which drugs. I’m a recreational athlete and thought that this would be truly useful in helping me avoid ingesting substances that could get me sidelined from a competition.
For example, when I got all four of my wisdom teeth pulled out, the surgeon prescribed Tylenol #3 for me. Well, that Tylenol #3 could have set off a positive drug test if I had taken it because it contains codeine which is a form of morphine. I asked both the surgeon and the pharmacist that gave me the Tylenol #3 whether it would result in a positive drug test. Neither of them knew the answer. Now, I was actually smart enough to look up the ingredients on the web and see whether they were controlled substances. Had I not done this, taken the drugs, and got tested I would of “Sorry, Out of Luck!” because WADA doesn’t care if you ingest it accidentally because it is the athlete’s responsibility to know what he/she is taking.
So, can I get some feedback here as to whether I should go stick it to the moderators?
I’m not sure what you mean by “stick it to the moderators.” However, I think you’d do better to make your best argument on behalf of your closed thread rather than to go after moderators.
Yeah, it does look like you’re trying to explain a positive drug test, but it’s somewhat ironic that Cecil is giving shrooming advice in his latest column.
My opinion is that it should have not been closed, it’s a factual question no matter your motives, and I’d bet the Cecil column would have been closed as well. Every company fires their managers wholesale after 2 years or so… SDMB needs to off its moderators as well.
Chasing Dreams: Welcome to the Dope. **Xash ** did seem to be a little short in ending your thread and I am not sure what the "Answers to your OP may be used to explain a positive drug test. " indicates.
It sounds counter to fighting ignorance. However phrases like “stick it to the moderators” are the wrong way to seek clarification.
They are pretty quick to close illegal drug threads around here that might encourage use or explain how to use or how to get. I did not realize it extended to knowing what could set off a positive drug test.
For years, by word of mouth, I have heard about do not eat poppy seeds bagels before a urine test. Your thread would have been a good place for this rumor to be debunked or supported.
Posting here in the pit is the correct place to inquire about why your thread was closed, you could also Email the GQ mods to get more information.
The four GQ mods are xash, Rico, DrMatrix, samclem.
I’m guessing it was closed because it was kind of a hybrid thread that didn’t know where it belonged. I couldn’t tell for sure whether it was asking a factual question, expressing an opinion, trying to start a discussion, or what. So it didn’t exactly fit in GQ, or any other forum.
**Sam ** as long as you joined the conversation could you provide us with guidelines of what would be acceptable in GQ on the subject of false positives for drug tests.
**Xash’s ** statement made it sound like any GQ thread that … actually I cannot tell what Xash thought was wrong. Even if the answers could “explain a positive drug test”, so what? Why is that not fit for GQ.
I had a friend in 1985 that almost got thrown out of the Navy for taking a Tylenol 3. He was ignorant of the Codeine in Tylenol 3 as was his Mom who gave it to him. It took a lot of wrangling to clear things up and he had to go for a urine test weekly through Boot Camp and A school.
It’s a felony to distribute one’s prescription narcotics like that. These days, lack of a valid prescription for drugs consumed costs many people their livelihoods.
I won’t comment on this one as I didn’t close it. You’ll have to get Xash to explain his action.
I will say that drug threads in general present the greatest challenge in moderating the board, at least to me. It’s a fine line between a general discussion about drugs and their effects, as opposed to a discussion that might be useful to tell someone how to circumvent a drug test. Just a moderator call, much like we’ve done on lock picking, etc.
I agree with the OP, I think they’re too strict regarding discussions of legal and illegal drugs, though I understand there are reasons they need to err on the side of caution, for the sake of the Reader and the whole SD institution. I don’t like it, but I accept it as one minor annoyance in a great message board. There are tons of other things to talk about.
Thank you, I actually knew this, but I was relating what happen to one poor ignorant kid who was trying to improve himself and almost got derailed by a well-meaning mom. He and I were both 18 at the time. He was not the brightest kid to start with; I helped him through boot camp on the educational portion.
I do not believe that even today, too many people are being prosecuted for giving a single prescription narcotic pill to their son or daughter. It was bad timing, lack of knowledge and a long time ago.
samclem: Thank you for the response. Sounds like any thread that covers drug related matters needs to be written very carefully. I fully appreciate why a thread on “How do you make LSD at home?” is verboten, but I would hope we could talk about false positives if we do not wander into things like (fake concept, do not try this, I just made it up) “Taking Castor Oil right before a Urine Test will mask cocaine use.”
Sounds like a pretty lame closure, to me.“It could be used to explain a positive on a drug test?” So what? It can also prevent a false positive, which strikes me as much more important. Besides, so far as I know, lying about a positive drug test is not actually against the law, so what board rule did the thread question?
Part of the OP came across to me as seeking information to negate a positive drug test. The rest of the OP came across as a rant and some rambling. Even without the drug related question, I might have closed the thread for content, or moved it to an appropriate forum. In this specific case, I did not see it fit to move to any other forum.
Drug related threads are among the most difficult to moderate. The relevant portion of the Registration Agreement is:
A well worded OP might have been allowed to stay, if the intent was clear to me. For example, see this current GQ thread that asks a very similar question in a much more coherent way:
Chasing Dreams, the information you provided in your Pit OP makes a lot more sense than did your GQ OP. If you are still inclined towards posting your original question in GQ, please feel free to email me or any of the other GQ mods to clear your OP before you post it.
I’ll apologize if I’m wrong, Xash, but I don’t think the type of drugs being discussed in the thread were illegal. Unethical perhaps, but not illegal. He was talking about false positive drug tests in sports, presumably for things like EPO, GH, etc. Those are NOT illegal substances. Hell, even if they were, a simple of reading of thread shows it wasn’t to “promote illegal activity”.
A Canadian here to testify that you do need a prescription for Tylenol 3 in Canada.
With regard to our relative freedoms of drug use, the earlier history of thalidomide and America’s persistence in rejecting its approval while many other countries approved its use stands out as extremely fortuitous for Americans today.
I understand that the use of substances prohibited in sport is usually a sporting offense rather than a criminal offense, but there is an overlap. Some substances prohibited in sport are also prohibited by law.
The current rules of the SDMB do not allow for discussion on how to circumvent a drug test by using masking agents (evasion) but do allow for discussion on how to avoid ingesting substances that could test positive (avoidance), which is what makes this particular topic tricky because the answers in both cases will be similar, and it is difficult to determine intent.
As I have stated in my earlier post, the drug issue was not the only reason the thread was closed.
But if one has an overzealous prosecutor on the case, or holds a professional license and has a strict licensing board to contend with, it can get damned ugly.