Spot saliva test a way to curb drugged drivers

A RIDE program. (QMI Agency)

We’ve all heard of roadside breathalyser tests when it comes to drinking and driving.

But spot saliva tests for drug use?

That’s the recommendation from two Western University legal experts who have tabled a study on drug use and driving for Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD) Canada.

Western law professors Erika Chamberlain and Robert Solomon claim that while the number of people driving while high on drugs is up, enforcement is lax when it comes to charging people with impaired driving because drug use is often hard to prove.

“You have more and more young people admitting to driving after drug use, not just after consuming alcohol,” said Chamberlain.

“I don’t think people realize that this is a growing problem,” said Chamberlain.

Already used in Australia and some European cities, roadside saliva tests are a quick and easy way to check for drugs, Chamberlain said.

Just like a breathalyzer, which detects the driver’s blood alcohol level, the saliva test would be used to test targeted drugs and the amount in the driver’s system.

While it’s likely going to be a few years before we see roadside saliva tests as frequently as we see drunk driving blitzes, Chamberlain said, drug-impaired driving is not an issue the government can ignore.

“It’s just going to become a greater and greater problem,” she said.

alex.weber@sunmedia.ca

--- --- ---

BY THE NUMBERS

500 — Officers in Canada qualified to conduct DREs.

$17,000 — Cost to train each officer.

2 — Officers in the London police force trained in DRE.

65,183 — Impaired driving charges laid in Canada in 2010.

915 — Of those impaired charges were for drug-impaired driving.

--- --- ---

WHAT’S RECOMMENDED

A roadside saliva test administered by police officers to screen drivers suspected of being high on drugs while behind the wheel.

HOW IT WORKS

• The test would be similar to ones used in the Australian state of Victoria, where police officers are able to demand a saliva sample from any driver at the roadside.
• The driver uses a swab to provide a saliva sample and if it tests positive for any of the targeted drugs, the driver must accompany police and take a second test, which is sent to a lab to be analyzed.
• If that test is also positive the driver is charged.
• For the system to work, the government would have to establish a specific amount for each of the drugs targeted that would mean the driver was in fact “high” at the time of the test, because some drugs can stay in a person’s body long after the impairing affects have worn off.

SKEPTICISM

While DREs accurately determine if a person has drugs in their system, the courts remain skeptical about the link between the presence of drugs in a driver’s system and impairment because some drugs can stay in a person’s body long after the effects have worn off.

--- --- ---

ENFORCEMENT NOW

Under the Criminal Code, it’s difficult for police officers to determine if someone is driving while high. If an officer suspects someone is driving while impaired by drugs they can administer a physical co-ordination test before launching a multi-step Drug Recognition Evaluation (DRE), a process designed to reveal whether a driver is impaired by one of the seven classes of frequently abused drugs — depressants, inhalants, phencyclidine, cannabis, stimulants, hallucinogens and narcotics.

--- --- ---

WHO’S DRIVING HIGH?

• Over the last decade, driving while high on drugs has become more common in Canada.
• A 2007 Health Canada study found that nearly 40% of people ages 15 to 24 reported driving within two hours of using cannabis, compared with the 20% that reported driving after drinking alcohol.
• A 2011 study comparing alcohol and drug use among fatally injured drivers from the Canadian Centre on Substance Abuse found one-third of the drivers had drugs in their system.
• Unlike drunk drivers who tend to be more prevalent at night and on weekends, drug-positive drivers are spread relatively evenly across days of the week.

Posted by Drug Test Australia

See our Australian Standard Saliva Tests 

drugtestaustralia.com.au

Phone: 1300 660 636

Email Enquiries: sales@drugtestaustraliua.com.au

By Alex Weber, The London Free Press

Wednesday, November 28, 2012 10:27:34 EST PM

Original Article http://www.lfpress.com/2012/11/28/spot-saliva-test-a-way-to-curb-drugged-drivers

Police take 1700 drink or drug-affected drivers off the streets

Police test drivers for drugs. Picture: Tim Carrafa Source: Sunday Herald Sun

POLICE have taken 1700 drink or drug-affected drivers off the streets of Victoria in the first phase of its summer road enforcement campaign.

Operation RAID – Remove All Impaired Drivers – detected more than 36,500 traffic offences during the past three weeks, 3000 more than in the same period last year.

Assistant Commissioner for Road Policing Robert Hill said he was astounded.

“It just astounds me that despite the research, despite the education, despite the heartache, people are still willing to risk their lives on the road,” Mr Hill said.

“I look at incidents like the terrible collision that claimed five lives in Lara over the weekend and wonder what more we as police could have done?”

“But it’s not just up to the police. Everyone needs to play their part and show some responsibility – drivers, passengers and pedestrians alike,” he added.

One driver, a 58 year old Yarrawonga man, was seen talking on a mobile phone and holding a can of beer while unsuccessfully trying to steer his Holden ute along the Murray Valley Highway in Cobram East around 2.35 last Thursday.

“The incident occurred at the same location where two days prior, a 20-year-old Mulwala woman was killed after her vehicle collided with a tree,” Victoria Police spokeswoman Cath Allen said.

One disqualified motorist was caught with drugs in his system in the same location in Bittern and same operation as he had the year before.

And five drug drivers were detected in the Mornington Peninsula area all on Saturday night.

“Over the last three weeks during this operation, we’ve breath tested 671,863 motorists and drug tested a further 1580 motorists,” Mr Hill said.

"We’ve had more police on the road than ever, working around the clock to deter and take these risk-takers off our roads.

“My challenge to all road users, two weeks out from Christmas, is stay safe or stay off the road this summer,” he added.

The operation detected:

• 1580 drink driving offences

• 196 drug driving offences

• 1092 disqualified/suspended drivers

• 1542 unlicensed drivers 

• 3191 unregistered vehicles 

• 10,819 speeding offences 

• 3152 mobile phone offences 

• 2576 disobey signs/signals 

• 262 impoundments 

• 1528 seat belt offences. 

The 52-day campaign will run across Victoria until January 9. 

Posted By Drug Test Australia

Original http://www.news.com.au/national/police-take-1700-drink-or-drug-affected-drivers-off-the-streets-of-victoria/story-fndo4cq1-1226533910237

• Jon Kaila
• Herald Sun
• December 11, 201212:00AM

'Faking It' Products being used to 'pass' drug tests

With drug testing and pre-employment medical screening becoming more commonplace in workplaces in Australia, especially within heavy industry as well as by police on roadside stops, a cottage industry has sprung up around products which assist users to 'pass' drug tests.

With names like 'Pass It', 'Ultimate Detox' and the like, products that are now being manufactured and sold online and in shops locally, with the express purpose to help consumers 'pass' drug tests.

How did this become a phenomenon? What is in these products? Do they actually work? We at Drug Test Australia took a closer look at the situation....

Products

The most common of these types of products found were 'Detox Drinks', not to be confused with health food stores' fruit-based products, these drinks are purported to 'cleanse' and 'remove unwanted substances from the urine', with some claiming to work in just one hour.

                                                              

The other main type of masking agents are 'Synthetic Urine', which is touted as 'premixed laboratory urine' which is purported to 'contain all the ingredients normally found in urine and is balanced for pH, specific gravity, creatinine, and several other urine characteristics.' These products are meant to be used in place of urine in urine tests.

Detox drinks main aim is to 'clean out' the system, with a goal of 'flushing out' drug metabolites from the system before they can be detected in a urine drug test.

The other type of these drinks aims to 'hold drug metabolites' in the body, allowing urine to pass through to testing without these metabolites present in the sample.



Synthetic urine products are meant to be carried by the user on their person before a drug test, so that they can pretend to urinate, while filling the test with synthetic urine. These are used with 'heat pads' to bring the sample up to body temperature, a key indicator in all effective urine drug test kits. The pads are meant to be worn under the clothes, to heat the bottle of synthetic urine.


While the above products aim to mask drug use in urine tests, interestingly, there are also now products available which claim to help the user pass a saliva drug test. These products come in the form of a mouth wash, which claims to leave 'no traces of unwanted residues' in the saliva. It claims to be effective for removing residue of Marijuana, Cocaine, Opiates, Methamphetamine, Amphetamines and prescription drugs.



Two other items worthy of note are shampoo's available, that tout being effective in 'passing' hair follicle drug tests, and urine additives.

                                                           
Hair follicle testing being a new and not very widely used technology in drug testing in Australia, takes a sample hair follicle for the test. This testing has been shown to detect drugs in the system up to 90 days.

Urine additives are purported to 'destroy drug metabolites in urine', the product claims to 'change the molecular structure' of the compound, and is poured straight into a urine sample, to 'fool' GC/MS (Gas chromatography-mass spectrometry, the instrument used to test samples in a laboratory, as with confirmation samples following a positive test result).

Availability

These products are available from online stores in Australia, as well as retail locations around the country. Their disclaimer is usually "not intended for use on lawfully administered drug tests and is to be used in accordance with all federal and state laws."

Detox drinks retails for around AUD $50-$60, synthetic urine at $70-$80, with the mouthwash at around $50.


Effectiveness

By looking at a wide variety of the types of products on the market, we can examine which would most effective.

Saliva testing

Saliva testing aims to pick up residue of drugs in the oral fluid. Commonly a mouth swab is inserted, and oral fluid collected from the inside of the mouth, cheeks and tongue. The approximate detection time for oral fluid varies with drug classes, but is typically a 6-12 hour window (if drugs were consumed in this period the test will show). Tests with positive results are to be sent fro confirmation testing using GC-MS.

The product intended to remove and 'mask' drug residue in the mouth, a mouth wash, if used correctly and if containing a high alcohol solution, could in theory 'pass' a drug test.

The problem is; that when an individual is selected for a random test, usually there is no time to swill and rinse with mouth wash, which would be quite obvious to all involved, rendering this product ineffective.

Urine Testing

Urine testing is based on based on immunoassay rapid test methods, and also relies on GC-MS fro confirmation of positive samples. The detection period varies between drug classes, and can be up to 30 days for THC in heavy users.

Synthetic Urine is effective in passing a drug test, provided that adulterants are not detected by the device (many have built in) and the temperature is correct. So if a subject is willing to place a large bottle of fake urine and a heating element down their pants, heat the urine to body temp, and pour it into the test without being detected by the drug tester, then they may pass this time.

Current Situation

Currently in Australia there are employees using these products to attempt to 'pass' drug tests. These products are easily available for purchase from retailers locally or for home delivery from online stores.

Drug testing training courses now include sections on identifying and preventing adulteration of tests by  test subjects. Also, any tester that is drug testing regularly, and keenly observes their surrounds should be able to catch these cheaters.

Even if an individual passes the test once, they will be caught the second or third time they attempt to use these methods. These are not by any means fool-proof methods, and the consequences for employees faking a test can be severe.

Random selection testing (drug testing a random sample of the employee body) as well as reasonable suspicion testing (drug testing after reasonable suspicion that an employee is impaired by drugs) will eventually 'catch' these employees, who will then have to face discipline within the organisation, or in the case of pre-employment tests, will never be offered a position in the company again.

We should be aware of these products on the market, and take appropriate measures to ensure they do not affect test results.

For more information on this or related issues, or to find out about our Australian Standard testing equipment contact us at Drug Test Australia;

Email; sales@drugtestaustralia.com.au
Website; drugtestaustralia.com.au
Phone; 1300 660 636

Drug testing pits privacy against safety

Posted by Drug Test Australia

Drug testing pits privacy against safety; 

Judges to hear Suncor arguments

Original By Amanda Stephenson, Calgary Herald November 24, 2012 http://www.calgaryherald.com/health/Drug+testing+pits+privacy+against+safety/7605165/story.html#ixzz2DOosEK6t

A lab technician tests samples for drugs.

A three-judge Alberta Court of Appeal panel will next week hear from Suncor Energy Inc. as the oilsands giant argues against an injunction blocking its proposed random employee drug testing program.

Next month, the Supreme Court of Canada will hear the case of Irving Pulp and Paper, a New Brunswick company whose plan to have its employees submit to mandatory breathalyzer tests has been fought tooth and nail by the same union that represents Suncor workers.

Both cases will be watched closely by employers, safety companies and privacy experts, as the courts try to find a balance between safety on the job and an individual's right to privacy.

Unlike the United States, where workplace drug tests are relatively common, Canada has had little experience with randomly administered on-the-job tests. But that could be about to change.

"Employers have to take action. They're responsible for maintaining a safe work environment," says Pat Atkins, administrator of Alberta's Drug and Alcohol Risk Reduction Pilot Project (DARRPP). "There are problems in the oilsands related to alcohol and drugs ... and we think it would be irresponsible for organizations not to take action, given the concerns they're seeing."
Those concerns range from drug paraphernalia found on work sites to workplace accidents caused by drunk or stoned employees.

Suncor has stated three of the seven deaths that have occurred at its Fort McMurray oilsands operation since 2000 involved workers under the influence of alcohol or drugs.
"Every day that passes, the risk increases," Suncor lawyer Tom Wakeling told the Alberta Court of Appeal last month. "The Suncor workplace is inherently a dangerous space.

The consequences of mistakes in this hazardous environment may include catastrophes."
Most oilsands companies already have some form of drug-testing policy in place - in most cases, testing occurs after an accident takes place, or if an employee exhibits behaviour that provides "just cause." In some cases, employees must pass a drug test before being hired for a certain position or before being contracted to work on a certain job site.

DARRPP is different. The two-year pilot project, led by a working group of oilsands industry employers and labour providers, aims to introduce completely random drug testing in "safety sensitive" positions at participating workplaces.

Organizers of the project point to U.S. data that indicates random testing is more likely to catch workplace drug and alcohol problems than incident-driven testing.

One of the first companies to get on board with DARRPP was Suncor, which announced in June its plan to implement mandatory random drug tests for safety sensitive employees at its oilsands facilities. However, before Suncor could implement its proposal, a grievance was filed by the Communications, Energy, and Paperworkers Union. The union, which represents 3,400 workers at the Suncor site, argued random drug testing violates its members' right to privacy.
"This is about the right to preserve their bodily integrity, quite frankly. Their privacy, their dignity," union lawyer Ritu Khullar told the appeals court last month.

Days earlier, a Court of Queen's Bench Judge issued an injunction, ruling Suncor cannot move ahead with its program until the union's grievance can be reviewed by a labour arbitration board. Suncor appealed, and that appeal is set to be heard on Wednesday.

The same union is also fighting Irving Pulp and Paper, the New Brunswick company that introduced a workplace safety policy in 2006 that included random alcohol testing for employees. That case will be heard by the Supreme Court of Canada in December.
Atkins said DARRPP is confident it is well within its legal rights.
"We believe we have designed the project in such a way to respect privacy and human rights," Atkins said.

Ed Secondiak, president of ECS Services - which has designed drug testing programs for large and small corporations for 18 years - says there are ways to ensure employees' rights are respected while still reducing the risk of on-the-job substance abuse.

Secondiak said when he designs a program, all drug test results are reviewed by a medical review officer. If a test comes back positive, the medical review officer will speak privately to the employee in question, and if he or she can provide a medical reason for why they might have a drug in their system, they are given an all-clear without their employer ever being informed of the original test results.

Test results are kept under lock and key with limited access, and are never shared with outside agencies without the employee's permission.

Secondiak says in most cases, when a person fails a test, he or she is sent for a substance abuse assessment. An addictions counsellor will decide whether the individual can come back to work, or needs more treatment. He said in many cases, being flagged by a workplace test is exactly the push some addicts need to get treatment and turn their lives around.
"I would say there's a high success rate when you're dealing with alcohol and marijuana in terms of being able to bring people back (to the job)," he says.

Dr. Charl Els, an addictions psychiatrist with the University of Alberta, agrees substance abuse in the workplace is a serious issue. Using U.S. statistics as a base - because there are no reliable Canadian statistics - he estimates that 8.3 per cent of full-time workers use illicit drugs.
"We likely are only seeing the tip of the iceberg in terms of the visible cases of substance use and abuse," Els says. "It's well accepted that we underestimate the prevalence and the actual impact."

Els also believes the nature of the oilsands industry means workers there are more likely to use drugs.

"It's typically a young, male population, there's a lot of excess time when they don't work, there's a lot of disposable income and cash in the pocket. They're typically not with their families, they're isolated. So there's a number of factors that make people more prone to use," he says.

However, Els says random drug testing is the wrong approach. He says a typical urine test only detects the presence of a substance in a person's system - it can't detect whether the person is impaired. That means it cannot differentiate between a person who smoked marijuana 20 minutes earlier and is stoned on the job versus a person who smoked a joint at a weekend party three days ago.

"The vast majority of people who use cannabis instead of having a beer on Friday evening may well test positive on Monday morning, and without it remotely having any impact on workplace impairment or occupational risk," Els says. "What they will detect is a whole lot of normal, recreational users with no risk to the workplace. And that I view as an invasion of privacy."

Els adds there are a lot of workers and professionals other than oil sands employees who can be considered to be doing "safety specific" work, and they aren't being subjected to random drug tests.

"You can imagine the uproar if I suggested tomorrow we need to start testing all physicians for cannabis," he said. "By this logic, any individual operating a vehicle for work should not be able to do so unless they can test negative."

Els says he has no problem with post-accident or just cause workplace drug testing, it's the random testing he opposes. He says there simply isn't enough solid evidence that random drug testing reduces the rates of workplace accidents, adding he too will be watching the Suncor case and the Irving Pulp and Paper case with interest.

"I would be surprised if random testing will actually be cleared as acceptable and not in violation," he says.

Contact us;
Website; www.drugtestaustralia.com.au
Email; Sales@drugtestaustralia.com.au
Phone; 1300 660 636

Call for drug tests to catch patient's dealing their medication

Posted by Drug Test Australia

Original; Call for drug tests to trap patient dealersSave

By Julia Medew

Nov. 18, 2012, 3 a.m.
http://www.theherald.com.au/story/1128078/call-for-drug-tests-to-trap-patient-dealers

PATIENTS being given powerful painkillers should be routinely drug tested to make sure they are not selling their drugs on the booming black market, doctors say.

While addicts ''doctor shopping'' for prescriptions is well known, the head of pain management at the Royal Adelaide Hospital, Penny Briscoe, said there was now evidence of ''fossil pharming'' in Australia where elderly people sell their medication to supplement their pensions.Leading pain and addiction medicine experts say there is increasing evidence of doctors being scammed for large doses of prescription drugs, particularly addictive opioids such as OxyContin.

Dr Briscoe said an elderly palliative care patient recently admitted to selling his drugs to boost his income, raising the prospect that more patients were doing the same without their doctors knowing.

''I think we should be screening a lot more patients than we are and if you're going to do it, you have to do it to everybody and tell patients about it. You can't discriminate on age, sex or the number of tattoos,'' she said.

The head of clinical services at Turning Point Alcohol and Drug Centre, Matthew Frei, said that while most people abusing prescription opioids were getting them from doctors for themselves, some were getting them from elderly relatives who were either selling them or passing them on.

''I certainly have seen people who say their source for the drug was an elderly relative,'' he said. ''I don't think it's extraordinarily common but it's possible we're not hearing about it.''

Another addiction medicine specialist, Philip Crowley, said urine testing patients on opioids should be standard treatment.

''There's a strong economic incentive to sell these drugs. You can sell one Kapanol [morphine] tablet for up to $80 so if you get a pack of 20, you can certainly make enough to pay your rent and power bill.''

It comes as doctors are increasingly falling prey to sophisticated scams to get large amounts of prescription drugs.

State health departments have advised doctors about various scams this year including fraudulent prescriptions and fake letters from doctors to get hundreds of OxyContin tablets from dozens of doctors.

Some people stole pages from GPs' prescription pads while they weren't looking.

Others created fake prescriptions using images on the internet, or posed as doctors.

In one extraordinary case, a Victorian man got prescriptions for anabolic steroids by calling a GP and successfully pretending to be a hospital specialist who was referring a patient (himself) to the GP to obtain the prescriptions.

''The same offender obtained more than 800 anabolic steroid injections by presenting forged prescriptions, and obtained enough testosterone to treat 87,000 sheep by convincing a veterinary practitioner that he was a sheep farmer,'' a Victorian health department document says.

Health authorities say prescription opioids are increasingly becoming a drug of choice on the streets because of their purity and low cost. Sydney's medically supervised injecting centre recently reported that two thirds of its 225 daily clients were now injecting prescription opiates, especially OxyContin.Another patient has been using a fraudulent letter from an interstate medical clinic that has a number on it that connects to his female accomplice.

The dangerous trend appears to be causing more deaths. An analysis by researchers at the National Drug and Alcohol Research Centre at the University of NSW found 500 Australians aged 15 to 54 died of an opiate overdose in 2008, up from 360 in 2007.

Only one third were from heroin. Preliminary figures suggest there were 612 such deaths in 2009, a 22 per cent increase from 2008, and 705 in 2010, a 15 per cent increase from the year before.

Contact us at Drug Test Australia
Website; www.drugtestaustralia.com.au
Email; Sales@drugtestaustralia.com.au
Phone; 1300 660 636

Police force passes the drug test; Victorian police

FEWER than 1 per cent of drug and alcohol tests of Victorian police have come up positive, with cannabis the most-detected drug.

Figures obtained by The Age under freedom of information laws show the force checked 1625 of its members in the five years since tests began, with 13 returning positive results.

Testing falls into four categories: targeted at police believed to be abusing drugs and alcohol; those obligatory after a ''critical incident'' such as a high-speed chase or police shooting; random and blanket testing of ''high risk'' work units; and testing on ''performance management'' grounds.

Targeted, or 'investigative'', testing has returned seven positives since 2008; three police have returned positive results in performance-based testing and three members of high-risk units - such as the drug squad and special operations group - have tested positive.

Two tested positive for both cocaine and heroin, five for cannabis, two for amphetamines, one for steroids, one for both steroids and amphetamines and two for alcohol.

''The alcohol and other drug testing policy focuses on the fitness for duty responsibilities of all Victoria Police employees,'' a police spokeswoman said. ''Employees need to be fit for duty and not affected by alcohol or other drugs. It is equally important that employees feel assured that colleagues are not affected by alcohol or other drugs. ''But it is as much a welfare-based issue as an ethical one. This is also about the community having trust in Victoria Police - and if our members are enforcing laws around illicit drug use, they also need to obey the same laws.

''The positive results confirm the drug and alcohol testing policy fully supports the ethical standards and behaviours expected of sworn members of Victoria Police.''

Police union secretary Greg Davies welcomed the low number of positive results, but said Victoria Police was using its power to test in high-risk areas - or ''specific work units'' - to unfairly take aim at certain suburban police stations.

''We're pleased, but not at all surprised, that the results of the drug testing within the police force are at the low levels they are,'' he said.

''We do, however, retain our concerns that the police force can walk into a police station and, for no apparent reason, determine that that is a specific work unit for the purposes of drug-testing everybody that works there.''

Adapted from The Age - Dan Oates

link: http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/police-force-passes-the-drug-test-20121021-27zlm.html

UCI knew Drug Testing System Flawed

LOS ANGELES (AFP) - Cycling's governing body set up a drug testing system that was designed to fail and allow Lance Armstrong and other riders to avoid detection, said the ex-boss of the World Anti-Doping Agency.

Doping officials knowingly ran a testing regimen that the sport's top teams circumvented and where competitors would be tipped-off in advance, Richard Pound, who headed up the WADA between 1999 and 2007, told AFP in an interview.

Despite alleging eight years ago that cheating was rife, his complaints to the UCI (International Cycling Union) about the sport's anti-doping measures were repeatedly ignored, Pound said.

"It is not credible that they didn't know this was going on," Pound said.

"I had been complaining to UCI for years. They come in in the morning at 5.00 am and do tests then go away, and riders are not chaperoned.

"The race starts at 1.00 pm to 2.00 pm in the afternoon and there are no tests prior to race to see if they are bumped up," adding that after a day in the saddle, riders would be unchaperoned for an hour before being tested again.

"So then you go in and get saline solutions and other means of hiding the effects (of performance-enhancing drug) EPO and whatever else it is," he said.

"You have to say 'I wonder if it was designed not to be successful?'" Pound said of the system, lambasting the UCI, which is under attack in the wake of a devastating US Anti-Doping Agency (USADA) report on Armstrong.

The report, which was released Wednesday, detailed Armstrong's alleged use of testosterone, human growth hormone, blood doping and EPO and included sworn statements from 26 people, including 11 former teammates.

The sports agency, which had already stripped the cyclist of his seven Tour de France titles, said Armstrong orchestrated the most complex doping scheme in sports history.

Pound, a Canadian lawyer turned sports official whose reported comments in 2004 about alleged doping earned a rebuke from Armstrong, said the buck must stop with the UCI.

"If they persist with denial then they put their whole sport in jeopardy," he said, noting that doping investigations may spread to the Spanish and Italian professional cycling communities, among others.

UCI President Pat McQuaid argued earlier this week that the sport "has moved on" and better tests mean riders are now much cleaner than in the previous era, in which Armstrong, now aged 41, competed.

"The peloton today is completely different," McQuaid said.

Pound, in reference to the USADA report, said he was dismayed by the scope and vivid details of the alleged doping practices by Armstrong and his US Postal Service teammates.

"I thought it was a very thoroughly researched report with evidence sworn or otherwise," said Pound, who remains on WADA's 38-member Foundation Board.

Armstrong has always maintained that he did not use banned substances during his career, but in August he chose not to contest the USADA's charges.

The Texan rider's days of sparing no expense to hire big-ticket lawyers to muzzle critics may also be coming to an end, Pound suggested.

"I don't think it is credible for Armstrong to say 'all 26 of these people are liars and cheats and axe grinders,'" the former WADA president said in reference to the sworn statements in the USADA dossier.

"I am afraid his time has just run out on that."

"What is going to be a surprise is (if) after all this, Lance persists in saying he never did it. You got to hope he will ... admit 'I was the best of the worst.'"

Pound said cancer survivor Armstrong should also speak out against the use of performance-enhancing drugs, not just for himself but his five children.

"What are his kids going to think of him? They are going to carry around this burden," said Pound, while stating that many Armstrong supporters, especially in the United States, are still likely to dismiss the allegations.

"There are a lot of people who have a big emotional investment in Armstrong," he said, alluding to the rider's comeback from cancer and the tens of millions of dollars he has raised to help people affected by the disease.

"They don't want to know that he was a cheater ... but if the pedestal he is on proves to be something he got by cheating, it isn't much of a pedestal."

http://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/a/-/world/15117251/uci-knew-drug-testing-system-was-flawed/