To translate: Corporate profits are more important than individual privacy. How much corporate profits are lost to simple theft? Yet we don't see searches of bags. How much corporate profits are lost to greedy Executives? Yet we don't see any reeling in of high pay or excessive stock options. How much corporate time and productivity is lost due to drug testing? Probably a little less than if you didn't have it but still the company has to pay for these tests so either way it may work out the same. Except here, you the individual lose.

Testing can not distinguish between on- and off- work drug usage. If you toke on Sunday the test will be positive on Monday even though you'll be fine that day. It can't distinguish between second-hand marijuana smoke versus first-hand. Tests may have problems with prescription drugs. In short, you may end up explaining to a corporate doctor why you failed a test and in doing so reveal more details of your private life than a company needs to know.

Testing is implied morality, that you shouldn't do drugs. Fine. Let's add alcohol to the list of illegal drugs. Sure, alcohol is legal but it's far more likely to be imbibed in corporate settings or duringlunch, far more likely to be the cause of (car) accidents. If safety is truly a concern let's make alcohol illegal.

OK, you don't mind testing. You think it helps safety matters. How would you feel if when you went to drive your car you haad to take a breathalyzer test? The car wouldn't start without passing the test. Don't laugh, it's been done. From that, it's a short step to design it where the car wouldn't run if you failed a general drug test. Picture that - peeing into your car - but I was imagining more of submitting a hair or saliva sample. And then picturing that as you drive you'd be attached to the car by a tube in your mouth and the car would continually monitor your drug state.