DRUG TESTS 

Products to Defraud Drug 

Use Screening Tests Are 

Widely Available 

Statement of Robert J. Cramer, Managing Director 

Office of Special Investigations 

United States Government Accountability Office

GAO Testimony

Before the Chairman, Subcommittee on 

Oversight and Investigations, Committee 

on Energy and Commerce, House of 

Representatives

For Release on Delivery 

Expected at 9:30 a.m. EDT 

Tuesday, May 17, 2005 

GAO-05-653T 
This is a work of the U.S. government and is not subject to copyright protection in the 

United States. It may be reproduced and distributed in its entirety without further 

permission from GAO. However, because this work may contain copyrighted images or 

other material, permission from the copyright holder may be necessary if you wish to 

reproduce this material separately. 
GAO-05-653T Drug Use Screening Tests 

Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee: 

I am pleased to appear before you today to discuss the ease with which the public can 

obtain products that are marketed, designed, and sold to defraud urine drug use 

screening tests such as those administered in the Federal Workplace Drug Testing 

Program.1 For purposes of my testimony, I will refer to these products as masking 

products and will discuss ways in which some businesses peddle them on the Internet. 

Masking products fall into one of four categories: (1) dilution substances that are added 

to a urine specimen at the time it is collected or are ingested before an individual 

submits a urine specimen; (2) cleansing substances that detoxify or cleanse the urine and 

are ingested prior to the time that an individual submits a urine specimen; (3) adulterants 

that are used to destroy or alter the chemical make-up of drugs and are added to a urine 

specimen at the time that it is provided for testing; and (4) synthetic or drug-free urine 

that is substituted in place of an individual’s specimen and provided for testing. My 

testimony today summarizes our findings. 

We began our work by searching the Internet to obtain an overview of the array of 

products available to mask drug use and located several Web sites that tout products 

that are used to mask the presence of illegal drugs when a urine drug test is 

administered. Then one of our agents, posing as a federal employee in a sensitive 

position who uses marijuana and cocaine and was looking for products that would allow 

him to pass an impending drug test, placed telephone calls to businesses we identified in 

our Internet search and purchased drug masking products from them. Through our 

 

1

 Drug tests can be performed on urine, saliva, perspiration, hair, and blood. Currently, the federal 

government relies solely on urine drug tests, which have a high degree of accuracy, low costs, and 

relatively unobtrusive method of collection. 
GAO-05-653T Drug Use Screening Tests 2

Internet search, we also identified and visited a retail store in the Washington, D.C. 

metropolitan area that sells these products. Additionally, we interviewed officials at the 

Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMSHA) of the 

Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) to obtain information on the operation 

of the Federal Drug Testing Program and the types of products or methods that are used 

by individuals to deceive drug tests. Finally, we obtained information from the 

Department of Justice (DOJ) and the Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) and about federal 

laws relating to the sale of masking products and researched state laws on this issue. We 

conducted our investigation from August 2004 through March 2005 in accordance with 

quality standards for investigations set forth by the President’s Council on Integrity and 

Efficiency. We are referring the results of our investigation to appropriate law 

enforcement authorities and thus are not naming the sources from which our purchases 

were made. 

In summary, we found that products to defraud drug tests are easily obtained. They are 

brazenly marketed on Web sites by vendors who boast of periodically reformulating their 

products so that they will not be detected in the drug test process. In addition to an 

array of products designed to dilute, cleanse, or substitute urine specimens submitted to 

testers by drug users, approximately 400 different products are available to adulterate 

urine samples. The sheer number of these products, and the ease with which they are 

marketed and distributed through the Internet, present formidable obstacles to the 

integrity of the drug testing process. 

The sales representatives of the businesses we contacted assured our investigator that 

the products they sold would enable him to pass an impending drug test despite his 
GAO-05-653T Drug Use Screening Tests 3

purported use of marijuana and cocaine. While all of the businesses offered products 

designed to defraud drug tests, the sales representatives recommended different types of 

masking products based on how frequently our investigator purportedly used drugs, 

whether he was subjected to drug tests that are announced or conducted randomly, and 

whether testing administrators closely monitored the collection of urine specimens. 

When our investigator said that he occasionally used marijuana and cocaine, the 

representatives recommended he purchase herbal supplements and minerals to be taken 

orally prior to the drug test. According to the sales representatives, these products act as 

cleansers or detoxifiers. When our investigator reported that he used marijuana and 

cocaine on a daily basis and that he was subjected to random drug tests, they 

recommended that, if he would not be closely monitored when he provided a specimen, 

he purchase synthetic urine or adulterants that are added to a urine specimen. The 

prices of the products that the sales representatives recommended ranged from about 

$30 to $79. 

Currently, there are a variety of laws related to the sale of drug masking products. Under 

federal law, if such products are determined to be “drug paraphernalia,” an individual 

may be prosecuted for selling them pursuant to 21 U.S.C. § 863. 2 However, we have not 

found any reported federal cases in which individuals have been prosecuted for such 

sales. In contrast, some states specifically prohibit the manufacture, marketing, or 

distribution of drug masking products. For example, New Jersey, Florida, and Kentucky 

broadly outlaw the sale of any product designed to defraud or falsify a drug screening 

 

2

 Drug paraphernalia is defined, among other things, as any equipment, product or material...primarily 

intended or designed for use in ... concealing ... a controlled substance. 21 U.S.C. § 863. 
GAO-05-653T Drug Use Screening Tests 4

test.3

 In some states, such as Louisiana and Texas, it is illegal for an individual to 

knowingly or intentionally deliver or manufacture substances designed to falsify or alter 

drug test results.4

 Additionally, at least nine other states (Arkansas, Illinois, Maryland, 

Nebraska, North Carolina, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, South Carolina and Virginia)5 have 

outlawed the sale of urine or adulterants for the purpose of passing drug tests. Of the 

nine states, only one—South Carolina—has prosecuted at least two individuals for 

marketing and selling masking products: one who sold urine substitution kits over the 

Internet6

 and another who advertised that his store carried products that are used to pass 

drug tests by cleansing the system.7

 Also, of the nine states, Illinois and Kentucky have 

made the offense punishable as a felony; South Carolina and North Carolina have made a 

second offense punishable as a felony; and it is a misdemeanor offense in the remaining 

states. 

Background 

Pursuant to Executive Order 12564, dated September 15, 1986, the federal government 

established the Federal Workplace Drug Testing Program. It is administered by SAMHSA 

for the purpose of preventing and deterring the use of illicit drugs in the federal 

workplace, and to ensure that as the federal government maintains employee 

productivity. In 2004, SAMHSA revised the Mandatory Guidelines for Federal Workplace 

 

3

 N.J. Stat. Ann. § 2 C:36-10 (West 2004); Fla. Stat. Ann. § 817.565 (West 2000); and Ky. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 

516.108 (Michie 1999 & Supp. 2004). 4

 La. Rev. Stat. Ann. §14:133.3 (West 2004) and Tex. Health and Safety Code Ann. § 481.133 (Vernon 2003). 5

 Ark. Code Ann. § 5-60-201 (Michie 2003);; 720 Ill. Comp. Stat. § 5/17-28 (WESTLAW through 2004 

legislation); Md. Code Ann., Crim. Law § 10-111 (2003); Neb. Rev. Stat. § 48-1908 (2002); N.C. Gen. Stat. § 

14-401.20 (2003); Okla. Stat. Ann. Tit. 63, § 7002 (2005); 18 Pa. Cons. Stat. Ann. § 7509 (West 2000); S.C. 

Code Ann. § 16-13-470 (Law. Co-op. 2003); and Va. Code Ann. § 18.2-251.4 (Michie 2004). 

6

 State v. Curtis, 591 S.E.2d 600. 7

 State v. Rothchild, 569 S.E.2d 346. 
GAO-05-653T Drug Use Screening Tests 5

Drug Testing Programs to require that specimen validity tests be conducted on all urine 

specimens collected.8

 Noting that there has been a recent increase in the number of 

chemical adulterants that are marketed on the Internet and in certain magazines, 

SAMSHA officials stated that validity tests are intended to produce accurate, reliable, 

and correctly interpreted test results and to decrease or eliminate opportunities to defeat 

drug tests. According to SAMHSA, approximately 400 different products are available to 

adulterate urine samples, and companies that market masking substances periodically 

offer new formulations of their products to avoid detection. 

Internet Businesses Tout 

Success of Masking Products 

To determine how businesses market drug masking products on the Internet, our 

investigator conducted an Internet search using the words “pass drug test.” He quickly 

found many Web sites that brazenly tout products and related information that enable 

users of illegal drugs to pass drug tests. For example, one Web site claimed that “passing 

a urine drug test has never been easier,” while another boasts that it offers a “variety of 

detox products [that] will beat the drug test or you’ll get 200% of your purchase price 

back.” Yet another site advises prospective customers that its product formulas change 

approximately every 6 to 9 months to stay ahead of new validity tests performed by drug 

testing laboratories. These Web sites offer a full array of drug masking products. 

 

8

 Initial validity screening of a urine specimen includes tests for color, odor, creatinine level, specific 

gravity, and pH level. When these test results do not fall within an acceptable range, more comprehensive 

testing is undertaken to assess the general validity of the specimen and confirm the presence of 

adulterants such as oxidants, nitrites, glutaraldehyde, chromate, and surfactant. 
GAO-05-653T Drug Use Screening Tests 6

Additionally, our investigator found some Web sites that provide an interactive format 

for prospective customers to find out which products best meet their individual needs. 

For example, one Web site provides a question and answer format for prospective 

customers and then recommends certain products based on the responses. Among these 

questions were: 

• How many times per week do you smoke or take other substances? 

• Are you watched when providing the sample? 

• Will you have at least an hour to prepare? 

• Are you taking a Department of Transportation regulated test? 

After a purchaser clicks on the most appropriate responses to these questions, the site 

presents pictures and descriptions of recommended products that are available for 

purchase. This Web site offers a “one-price-fits-all” approach and charges $32 for each of 

its products. It also provides a store locator that helps prospective customers find out 

whether retail stores in their local area carry these products. 

To further investigate how these businesses market drug masking products, our 

investigator placed telephone calls to some of them. Posing as a federal employee 

looking for ways to hide his purported cocaine and marijuana use in an impending drug 

test, our agent asked the sales representatives for each of these vendors for information 

on products that would enable him to pass a drug test. While each vendor offered a 

number of products, most of the sales representatives tailored the particular type of 

masking product they recommended to information they elicited from the investigator 

about his purported drug use. They asked, for example, how often he used drugs and 
GAO-05-653T Drug Use Screening Tests 7

when he had most recently used them. They also asked about testing procedures, such 

as whether tests are conducted randomly or are announced in advance, and whether 

individuals providing urine samples are closely monitored. 

When our agent described himself as a casual cocaine and marijuana user who 

undergoes announced drug tests, sales representatives recommended that he purchase 

cleansing products that are ingested orally prior to the test. According to the vendors, 

these substances detoxify or cleanse the urine if taken before a test is conducted. For 

example, one of the sales representatives said to our investigator, “if you can stay clean 

for at least two days, we have a detox drink that you would drink on the day of the test. 

It will keep you clean for five hours.” For $35,9

 our investigator purchased the “detox 

drink.” After telling another sales representative that he had used cocaine during the 

past week and had a drug test scheduled the following week, the representative told him 

“... the good news is we have a detox program. ... It’s a four day program, and basically 

if you do that, you’ll be OK for the test.” For $79, our investigator purchased the “detox 

program,” which came with a urine test kit that a buyer can use at home to conduct a 

pre-test before submitting a specimen for a drug test. 

When our investigator told the sales representatives that he uses cocaine and marijuana 

on a daily basis and undergoes random drug testing, they recommended that he purchase 

either synthetic urine or adulterant products. Recommending a synthetic urine product, 

a representative told our investigator, “you won’t have to be as careful with our product. 

But you can still get away with it and people do get away with it.” Our investigator 

 

9

 For purposes of our testimony, we are providing the actual price of the product, which does not include 

shipping and handling costs. 
GAO-05-653T Drug Use Screening Tests 8

purchased the product for $32. Another representative told our investigator that his 

company sells synthetic urine and that it is “better suited for random situations because 

the urine is premixed in the bag, sealed off, and irradiated so that it won’t go bad.” Our 

investigator paid $49.95 for this product. 

At the suggestion of two other sales representatives, our investigator placed orders for 

two adulterants. For $29.95, he purchased one adulterant that is designed for people 

who use drugs daily and are subject to random drug testing. This product consists of 

two small vials containing liquids that are added directly to the urine specimen before it 

is submitted for drug testing. Additionally, he spent $32 for another adulterant that is 

designed to be used at the drug test location. This product is a bag that contains two 

chemicals: one chemical is supposed to destroy the drug toxins and another purports to 

destroy traces of the first chemical. According to the product instructions, a urine 

specimen should be poured into the bag, mixed with the chemicals, and then poured into 

the specimen cup. 

Using the store locator function on one of the Web sites, we identified a store in the 

Washington, D.C. area that sells drug masking products. Posing as someone needing 

information on products that would ensure passing an impending drug test, we visited 

the store and observed a variety of masking products displayed for sale. The owner of 

the store told us that he has sold masking products for the past 11 years, and that on 

some days he sells up to 4 detox products. Additionally, he told us that he has repeat 

customers. For one of his customers, he special orders certain products. While the store

also carries synthetic urine, the owner advised us that the detox drinks are more popular 

and sell better. 
GAO-05-653T Drug Use Screening Tests 9

Laws Regarding the Sale of 

Drug Masking Products Vary 

Under federal law, it may be illegal to sell drug masking products if the products are 

determined to be “drug paraphernalia.” Specifically, under federal law, it is unlawful for 

any person to sell drug paraphernalia, which is defined as any equipment, product, or 

material... primarily intended or designed for use in ... concealing ... a controlled 

substance.10 The following factors may be taken into consideration in determining 

whether an item constitutes drug paraphernalia, including the instructions provided with 

the item concerning its use; descriptive materials accompanying the item which explain 

or depict its use; national or local advertising concerning its use; the manner in which the 

item is displayed for sale; and the existence and scope of legitimate uses of the item.11

However, officials from DOJ and DEA advised us that there have not been any federal 

cases in which an individual has been prosecuted for selling drug masking products 

under this statute and our independent research of federal case law databases did not 

find any. 

In contrast, some states have statutes that specifically prohibit the manufacture or 

distribution of drug masking products. For example, a New Jersey statute specifically 

prohibits individuals from manufacturing, selling, or giving “... any instrument, tool, 

device, or substance adapted, designed or commonly used to defraud the administration 

of a drug test.”12 Under the New Jersey statute, a person may be prosecuted if he or she 

submits a substance that purports to be from a person other than its actual source or 

 

10 21 U.S.C. § 863. 

11 21 U.S.C. § 863(e). 
GAO-05-653T Drug Use Screening Tests 10

otherwise engages in conduct intended to produce a false or misleading outcome of a 

drug test.13 Similarly, in Florida and Kentucky, it is illegal to manufacture, market, or 

distribute products intended to defraud any lawfully administered urine test designed to 

detect the presence of controlled substances.14 In some states, such as Louisiana and 

Texas, it is illegal for an individual to knowingly or intentionally deliver or manufacture 

substances designed to falsify or alter drug test results. 15 

In some other states, laws relating to drug masking practices are narrower. For example, 

in Nebraska it is illegal to provide bodily fluids for the purpose of altering the results of 

tests to determine the presence of drugs. In some states, such as Pennsylvania and 

Virginia, it is illegal to sell drug-free urine, but there is no specific prohibition on the sale 

of adulterants. In contrast, in some states such as South Carolina, Arkansas, North 

Carolina, Oklahoma, Illinois, and Maryland, it is illegal to sell urine or adulterants. 

However, of these states, only Illinois and Oklahoma prohibit the sale of synthetic urine. 

In our research of reported cases we found two cases in South Carolina in which 

individuals have been prosecuted for the sale of masking products. In one case that was 

decided in August 2002, the South Carolina Supreme Court upheld a conviction for 

violation of a statute that prohibits the possession of adulterants intended to defraud a 

drug test. In that case, the vendor placed an advertisement in a magazine for a novelty 

store he owned which read: “Taking a drug test? Want to cleanse your system? We carry 

Readi-Clean, Carbo-Clean Plus, Quick Tabs, One Hour, Zydot, One Hour Klear, Body 

 12 N.J. Stat. Ann § 2 C:36-10(b). 

13 N.J. Stat. Ann § 2 C:36-10 (a). 

14 Fla. Stat. Ann. § 817.565 and Ky. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 516.108. 

15 La. Rev. Stat. Ann. §14:133.3 and Tex. Health and Safety Code Ann. § 481.133. 
GAO-05-653T Drug Use Screening Tests 11

Flush.” An undercover agent purchased an adulterant Zydot after the store clerk assured 

him that the product would allow him to pass a drug test for marijuana. In upholding the 

conviction, the Court relied on, among other things, the advertisement the defendant 

placed rather than a determination whether the product effectively masks drug use.16 

Additionally, the South Carolina Supreme Court upheld the conviction of another vendor 

who sold urine substitution kits on the Internet.17 Included on the defendant’s Web site 

were claims that, “Our Complete Urine Test Substitution Kits allow anyone, regardless of 

substance intake, to pass any urinalysis within minutes.” 

Mr. Chairman, this concludes my statement. We will be pleased to respond to any 

questions that you or the other members of the Subcommittee may have. 

Contacts 

For further information regarding this testimony, please contact Robert J. Cramer at 

(202) 512-7445 or Paul Desaulniers at (202) 512-7435. 

 

(601266) 

 

16 State v. Rothchild, 569 S.E.2d 346. 17 State v. Curtis, 591 S.E.2d 600. 
The Government Accountability Office, the audit, evaluation and 

investigative arm of Congress, exists to support Congress in meeting its 

constitutional responsibilities and to help improve the performance and 

accountability of the federal government for the American people. GAO 

examines the use of public funds; evaluates federal programs and policies; 

and provides analyses, recommendations, and other assistance to help 

Congress make informed oversight, policy, and funding decisions. GAO’s 

commitment to good government is reflected in its core values of 

accountability, integrity, and reliability. 

The fastest and easiest way to obtain copies of GAO documents at no cost 

is through GAO’s Web site (www.gao.gov). Each weekday, GAO posts 

newly released reports, testimony, and correspondence on its Web site. To 

have GAO e-mail you a list of newly posted products every afternoon, go 

to www.gao.gov and select “Subscribe to Updates.” 

The first copy of each printed report is free. Additional copies are $2 each. 

A check or money order should be made out to the Superintendent of 

Documents. GAO also accepts VISA and Mastercard. Orders for 100 or 

more copies mailed to a single address are discounted 25 percent. Orders 

should be sent to: 

U.S. Government Accountability Office 

441 G Street NW, Room LM 

Washington, D.C. 20548 

To order by Phone: Voice: (202) 512-6000 

TDD: (202) 512-2537 

Fax: (202) 512-6061 

Contact: 

Web site: www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm 

E-mail: fraudnet@gao.gov

Automated answering system: (800) 424-5454 or (202) 512-7470 

Gloria Jarmon, Managing Director, JarmonG@gao.gov (202) 512-4400 

U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7125 

Washington, D.C. 20548 

Paul Anderson, Managing Director, AndersonP1@gao.gov (202) 512-4800 

U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7149 

Washington, D.C. 20548 

GAO’s Mission 

Obtaining Copies of 

GAO Reports and 

Testimony 

Order by Mail or Phone 

To Report Fraud, 

Waste, and Abuse in 

Federal Programs 

Congressional 

Relations 

Public Affairs 

PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER