Hiring in life sciences? Share your open positions with our professional community. Read more Close

Advertisement

Beating Drug Tests by Ingesting Detoxifying Agents or Adulterating Urine in vitro: Are These Practices Effective?

Created on 18 Jul 2025

Authors

Amitava Dasgupta

Published in

Therapeutic drug monitoring. Jul 17, 2025. Epub Jul 17, 2025.

Abstract

Workplace drug testing aims to deter employees from abusing drugs. Nevertheless, people try to beat such tests in several ways. Therefore, it is important for drug-testing laboratories to identify adulterated specimens before analysis.
A literature search on beating drug tests, urine adulteration, flushing agents, detoxifying agents, and Internet-based adulterants, published in English from 1986 to present, was conducted using PubMed, ScienceDirect, Scopus, Web of Science, and ResearchGate.
People try to beat drug testing in two ways: by ingesting detoxifying agents to wash out abused drugs or by adding adulterants (household chemicals or Internet-based chemicals) to urine in vitro. However, drug-testing laboratories conduct specimen validity tests (pH, creatinine, specific gravity, and temperature tests) and specialized tests to identify adulterants, such as potassium nitrite, glutaraldehyde, pyridinium chlorochromate, and oxidants in urine.
By combining specimen integrity and specialized tests to detect adulterants, laboratory staff can identify adulterated urine specimens before analytical testing. As such adulterated specimens are considered equivalent to refusal to undergo drug testing, individuals that altered their samples fail the test. Nevertheless, workplace drug-testing programs have limitations, including the inability to target novel psychoactive drugs in the test protocol and the inability to detect newly introduced urinary adulterants.

PMID:
40674630
Bibliographic data and abstract were imported from PubMed on 18 Jul 2025.

Read full publication at:
Please sign in to see all details.

Advertisement

Stats

  • Community rating n/a 0 votes
  • Reviewers' rating n/a 0 votes
  • Your rating

1-terrible, 9-excellent. How would you rate this publication? Sign in in to submit your rating.

  • Recommendations n/a n/a positive of 0 vote(s)
  • Views 74
  • Comments 0

Recommended by

  • No recommendations yet.

Post a comment

You need to be signed in to post comments. You can sign in here.

Comments

There are no comments yet.

Advertisement