Geesh. Since I have not succeeded in staying out of this thread, I may as well state my position instead of sniping from the sidelines.
First of all, the idea of the drug free workplace is that you are supposed to be safe from druggie co-workers. I don't agree with it especially, but that's the idea. So they make everyone take a drug test to endure that they aren't doing meth or marijuana at home or on the job, yes? It isn't enough not to do the stuff during work hours. So the idea is that these things affect you enough to affect your performance the next day. Which, in some cases they do. In this light, it is yes, a fine bit of hypocrisy for a brewery to have such a policy as enough alcohol the night before will very much affect your performance the next day. Their rationale of course is that alcohol is not, in se, illegal. Which may or may not be another fine bit of hypocrisy depending on your position on recreational drug use. Now this thread has foundered on the definition of a medicinal drug, which is something different. Alcohol, it seems to me, would qualify because of its anesthetic uses. The people who say that sugar is a drug may have a point in that many people think it's addictive and harmful, but if the diabetics don't think it's a remedy for anything, well, they of all people would know, right? Potassium is a mineral. You can have too much or too little, which can cause medical problems. In that sense it is possibly a remedy but not a drug. Ditto Synthroid and insulin, which are hormones. Birth control pills too for that matter. Food can be a drug according to Overeaters Anonymous but is not for most people. Some foods however can be remedies, for example, pineapple, ginger, basil and sage. Now that I have stirred the pot, I gotta get some work done <g> On 8/9/05, S. Isaac Dealey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Yeah, but the subject in question was the use of the term "a drug free > workplace". Doesn't seem to me like the sort of context that requires > a medical doctorate to define. > > > Using a generic dictionary for a legal or medical > > definition is silly. > > It's fine for basic common use definitions, but not for > > precise legal, > > medical, or technical definitions. > > > -Kevin > > > On 8/9/05, G <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> Now wait a minute. You might want to re-read your > >> definition. > >> > >> There were 3 different definitions, labelled 1-3. Any of > >> which could > >> identify a "drug". However, definition 1 had two > >> subsections to it, a) and > >> b). > >> > >> So for a substance to satisfy definition 1, it had to > >> both a) be used in > >> diagnosis, treatment or prevention AND b) be recognized > >> or defined by the US > >> Food Drug and Cosmetic Act. > >> > >> Sugar might be used to treat certain conditions, but if > >> it aint listed in > >> that Act...it aint a drug. > > > s. isaac dealey 954.522.6080 > new epoch : isn't it time for a change? > > add features without fixtures with > the onTap open source framework > > http://www.fusiontap.com > http://coldfusion.sys-con.com/author/4806Dealey.htm > > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Discover CFTicket - The leading ColdFusion Help Desk and Trouble Ticket application http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=48 Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:168645 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
