THC positive from ER visit but never smoked.

Tarheelpilot said:
Not treating a non-pilot that took a federally legal medical supplement with trace amounts of THC for a couple months as though they have a substance abuse history several years after the fact when they decide to be a pilot.

Does that sound reasonable?
Click to expand...
It only sounds reasonable if he is telling the truth. And he seems like a nice believable guy.

But for every one of the truthful folks there is a corresponding daily user, mildly cognitivly impaired, who also claims he doesn't use pot and alcohol and the positive test results must be the CBD and Nyquil. And golly gee whiz we should just believe all these nice people. Boo hoo to the big ol' meanie goverment for trying to verify his story. No one ever lies, do they...

Trust, but verify...
 
Mark K said:
It only sounds reasonable if he is telling the truth. And he seems like a nice believable guy.

But for every one of the truthful folks there is a corresponding daily user, mildly cognitivly impaired, who also claims he doesn't use pot and alcohol and the positive test results must be the CBD and Nyquil. And golly gee whiz we should just believe all these nice people. Boo hoo to the big ol' meanie goverment for trying to verify his story. No one ever lies, do they...

Trust, but verify...
Click to expand...
Well… let’s try responding to my actual post. It is irrelevant whether or not this individual OP is telling the truth. Anyone in the situation I described is currently treated as a substance abuser. Regardless of the actual facts. That’s not appropriate.
 
Mark K said:
It only sounds reasonable if he is telling the truth. And he seems like a nice believable guy.

But for every one of the truthful folks there is a corresponding daily user, mildly cognitivly impaired, who also claims he doesn't use pot and alcohol and the positive test results must be the CBD and Nyquil. And golly gee whiz we should just believe all these nice people. Boo hoo to the big ol' meanie goverment for trying to verify his story. No one ever lies, do they...

Trust, but verify...
Click to expand...
And this is how we're gonna get AI monitoring of pilots in realtime. We can no longer effectively sort the myriad causes for impairment (high-functioning chemically altered state or just potato brain) so we'll get a scoring system somehow.

I don't care if cap'n snoop is high as a kite if he can fly the plane. But CAMI is not the arbiter I want for it. They're sifting last year's dungheap to find tomorrow's constipation.
 
Tarheelpilot said:
Anyone in the situation I described is currently treated as a substance abuser. Regardless of the actual facts. That’s not appropriate.
Click to expand...
The FAA now has a first class applicant with a urine test + for THC. You assert that the rule is unfair, but offer no alternative to the current FAA pathway to ensure the safety of the flying public.
 
So we're back to just banning pilots who use legal substances.
StraightnLevel said:
Well, I would bet that if you asked 10,000 voters whether a THC user should fly airplanes over their city, the response would be about 9,995 in favor of strict policy. At some level government is still at least marginally responsive to the voting public.
Click to expand...
They'd say the same thing about you.
 
Mark K said:
The FAA now has a first class applicant with a urine test + for THC. You assert that the rule is unfair, but offer no alternative to the current FAA pathway to ensure the safety of the flying public.
Click to expand...
Why is the positive test even relevant to his medical application? If I go into the ER for appendicitis and I have a positive BAC, should the FAA treat me like an alcoholic?
 
Mark K said:
The FAA now has a first class applicant with a urine test + for THC. You assert that the rule is unfair, but offer no alternative to the current FAA pathway to ensure the safety of the flying public.
Click to expand...
Ok. I’ll explain it to you like you’re five. The context of the positive test should be considered. The scenario presented in this thread should only require a written statement from the applicant and a good drug test. Not being sent to HIMS jail and having to spend thousands of dollars to exercise airman privileges as happens today. Any positive THC test ever triggers that result. It’s unreasonable.

I’ll be real darn blunt. Anyone with the cognitive abilities to fly an airplane should be able to see an easy path for many scenarios that aeromed uses HIMS. It’s a dumpster fire of bureaucratic avoidance and profiteering by doctors. It’s criminal.
 
Lindberg said:
Why is the positive test even relevant to his medical application? If I go into the ER for appendicitis and I have a positive BAC, should the FAA treat me like an alcoholic?
Click to expand...
Your alternative-Ignore positive drug test done at an ER for LOC/vertigo. That's one approach, I suppose.
Tarheelpilot said:
Ok. I’ll explain it to you like you’re five. The context of the positive test should be considered. The scenario presented in this thread should only require a written statement from the applicant and a good drug test. Not being sent to HIMS jail and having to spend thousands of dollars to exercise airman privileges as happens today. Any positive THC test ever triggers that result. It’s unreasonable.
Click to expand...
Your alternative- Have any applicant who tests positive sign an affidavit that it was all a mistake, misunderstanding, it was the CBD, it was the cough medicine, his ate his brother's brownie. All is good because he signed a written statement saying all is good. Again, that is an approach.

Still, being five, I'm having trouble seeing how these alternatives protect public safety. We're just going to have to agree to disagree on this one and leave it at that.
 
Mark K said:
Your alternative-Ignore positive drug test done at an ER for LOC/vertigo. That's one approach, I suppose.

Your alternative- Have any applicant who tests positive sign an affidavit that it was all a mistake, misunderstanding, it was the CBD, it was the cough medicine, his ate his brother's brownie. All is good because he signed a written statement saying all is good. Again, that is an approach.

Still, being five, I'm having trouble seeing how these alternatives protect public safety. We're just going to have to agree to disagree on this one and leave it at that.
Click to expand...
If that’s the way you want to handle it. Can’t make the horse drink water.
 
Mark K said:
Your alternative-Ignore positive drug test done at an ER for LOC/vertigo. That's one approach, I suppose.

Your alternative- Have any applicant who tests positive sign an affidavit that it was all a mistake, misunderstanding, it was the CBD, it was the cough medicine, his ate his brother's brownie. All is good because he signed a written statement saying all is good. Again, that is an approach.

Still, being five, I'm having trouble seeing how these alternatives protect public safety. We're just going to have to agree to disagree on this one and leave it at that.
Click to expand...
I really do see both sides of the argument. I am telling the truth so it's hard to accept that I have to go through the whole process and be treated like an addict but it's completely reasonable and correct to think that for every truth teller there are many more liars.

It is what it is and the reality is the FAA has what I want right now so I'll just have to comply and do as they say.

Thank you all for the help. You'll probably see me more on here as I go through the whole process haha.
 
Jyyoo32 said:
I really do see both sides of the argument. I am telling the truth so it's hard to accept that I have to go through the whole process and be treated like an addict but it's completely reasonable and correct to think that for every truth teller there are many more liars.
Click to expand...

You have the right attitude which just helps… but don’t be conned into thinking THAT is why they do what they do or that it is reasonable. It’s a corrupt money thing… just an administrative agency run amok.
 
Jyyoo32 said:
I really do see both sides of the argument. I am telling the truth so it's hard to accept that I have to go through the whole process and be treated like an addict but it's completely reasonable and correct to think that for every truth teller there are many more liars.

It is what it is and the reality is the FAA has what I want right now so I'll just have to comply and do as they say.

Thank you all for the help. You'll probably see me more on here as I go through the whole process haha.
Click to expand...

You have the right mindset. I hope you are able to sort through it. Listen to @bbchien and you won't go wrong.
 
Lindberg said:
Why is the positive test even relevant to his medical application? If I go into the ER for appendicitis and I have a positive BAC, should the FAA treat me like an alcoholic?
Click to expand...
Alcohol isn’t illegal.
 
People are convicted on evidence every day in court. Their word is suspect until proven innocent. FAA operates in the same manner…your word against solid, recorded evidence. Testing and evaluation is the road to making sure the really bad apples are filtered out of the system. So even though you’re only a 1 on a scale from 1 to 10, you’re still on the scale and handled as an unknown. That’s the system as it stands right now and not likely to change in the near future.
 
Lindberg said:
Cool. We've gone from anyone's who's used legal hemp-derived THC products to substance abusers.

So just like alcohol, it's legal, can be used safely, and can be abused. Those who are under the influence and those who chronically abuse it should not fly.
Click to expand...
Enjoying the back and forth on this topic.

M2C
Lots of things alter your mood, cognition, etc. Some to a very small degree. Drink a cup of coffee before flying? Perks you up, but it is well understood the effect it has, the time to clear, etc. Drink a beer before flying? Don't do that - it is well understood how long it takes to clear in your system, what effect it has on your ability to think, etc.

I would not put TCH products in the coffee and alcohol category, as I don't believe it can be used as safely. If a person used TCH like alcohol or coffee, there's probably some lingering effects that warrant caution.
 
Dana said:
Neither are products containing less than 0.3% THC by weight.
Click to expand...
“A concentration of 0.3% Delta-9 THC is a low ratio that defines legal hemp. However, because total potency depends on the overall weight of the product (such as a heavy edible) rather than just the percentage, a 0.3% limit can still deliver a standard, noticeable psychoactive dose of 5mg to 10mg of THC.”

So basically you can still be impaired even if the product you’ve consumed has the legal concentration.
 
mryan75 said:
“A concentration of 0.3% Delta-9 THC is a low ratio that defines legal hemp. However, because total potency depends on the overall weight of the product (such as a heavy edible) rather than just the percentage, a 0.3% limit can still deliver a standard, noticeable psychoactive dose of 5mg to 10mg of THC.”

So basically you can still be impaired even if the product you’ve consumed has the legal concentration.
Click to expand...
Just like drinking mass quantities of "non-alcoholic" beer.
 
Kenny Phillips said:
Just like drinking mass quantities of "non-alcoholic" beer.
Click to expand...

Physically impossible because of volume. You would have to chug 18 NA beers in one hour, almost 2 gallons, which is about 4 times the capacity of your stomach.

The amount of CBD oil necessary to be impaired is one fluid ounce.

So no, not "just like".
 
mryan75 said:
“A concentration of 0.3% Delta-9 THC is a low ratio that defines legal hemp. However, because total potency depends on the overall weight of the product (such as a heavy edible) rather than just the percentage, a 0.3% limit can still deliver a standard, noticeable psychoactive dose of 5mg to 10mg of THC.”

So basically you can still be impaired even if the product you’ve consumed has the legal concentration.
Click to expand...
And still truthfully answer "no" to "use of an illegal substance".

But politicians, like those who passed the farm bill that legalized hemp, never have been good at math.
 
I was at a formal dinner in the early 1990’s seated next to a high ranking at the time politician (granted I was a kid and he was family, and it was thanksgiving at my grandpas farm) but I do distinctly to this day remember him say that there was a majority on both sides to legalize grass, but there was no equivalent to the alcohol breathalyzer to determine level of impairment, and until there was none of the politicians would vote for it.
 
This is an interesting summary.

It was dangerous, then it was as safe as beer, then it has long term effects, …….

 
Last edited:
How much of a problem is this? For driving or airplanes?

Seems a first good step would be to start compelling blood tests after crashes… then start just pulling privilege to drive if positive.

You are NOT gonna stop the addicts, can’t scare them out of anything. But really, how many TRUE addicts are causing problems!

I’d bet most problems (like crazy vast majority) are simply bad decisions. HARSH penalties stop them proactively.

Gonna have a hard time convincing me this is a difficult solution to at least try. If we’re (as a society) not willing to do at least this, then we’re not REALLY worried about this problem.

Wanna save A REAL NUMBER of lives? Ban driving… Fact is, we’re willing to accept 50 THOUSAND deaths a year for this perk.

So is this a real problem or not? Or just one we like to complain about but not really willing to do anything about?
 
Ed Haywood said:
Physically impossible because of volume. You would have to chug 18 NA beers in one hour, almost 2 gallons, which is about 4 times the capacity of your stomach.

The amount of CBD oil necessary to be impaired is one fluid ounce.

So no, not "just like".
Click to expand...
Wade Boggs could do it.
 
Back
Top