Alcohol Test May Be Condemning the Abstinent

That observer had a level of 350 ng/mL, while the cutoff used for a positive test in the experiment was 100 ng/mL, the same cutoff that is generally used out in the field.

None of the subjects who washed in the air-flow chamber had a positive test, though there were detectable levels.

Breathalyzer tests given to the subjects did not suggest any level of impairment.

The results confirmed that use of alcohol-containing hand wash can influence the EtG test, and the primary means appears to be inhalation, Dr. Liepman said.

“Recovering alcoholics, including those who are subject to urine monitoring, should avoid the use of alcohol-based hand sanitizer,” he said.

Dr. Liepman was motivated to perform the experiment because two nurses in his practice, both of whom were recovering opiate addicts and both of whom were pregnant, had tested positive for ethyl glucuronide and violated their recovery employment contracts, he said. Both were suspended for 1 month, just at the time they needed to be accumulating vacation hours so they could take time off for the birth of their babies.

Both denied drinking, neither tested positive for any other drugs, and both were doing well on the job.

One nurse measured 270 ng/mL on the EtG test, while the other measured 215 ng/mL, levels that might be considered fairly low for a substance abuser who has fallen off the wagon, since two drinks can produce a level of 23,000 ng/mL, Dr. Liepman said.

Both nurses reported washing their hands with sanitizer on the job upward of 30 times a day, a frequency that might explain why, among health care workers, so many of those who have been tripped up by the test have been nurses.

In the laboratory, Dr. Skipper has found that two nonalcoholic beers will cause a level of 93 ng/mL and gargling with Listerine can trigger a level of 100 ng/mL.