[Closed] I'm about to be screwed... the question is how hard? THC content content.

My fear is that I smoked 3 doobies yesterday, and at least once everyday (if not more) for the past 2 weeks.

...

...I'm not criticising him for it, but being realistic is helpful.

My fear is that I smoked 3 doobies yesterday, and at least once everyday (if not more) for the past 2 weeks.
Sorry but that's BS.
Ladies and Gentlemen of the jury, I rest my case.

What is your case?

[img] [/img]

You keep reposting that but it really doesn't support your argument that he's "probably always a little bit stoned". You just seem to want to cast aspersions without providing any real basis, and you rested your case after not actually making a case at all, so...

As others have said, the problem with testing for cannabis is a very blunt instrument as the test is for metabolites, rather than whether you are under the influence or not, my understanding is that all a test proves is that you have consumed it at some point within the last few weeks. You certainly don't stay high/impaired for a few weeks.

mountainman - Member
I know that here in Eire the courts and RSA cannot apply points to Uk licences for speed offence's.A reciprocle arrangement was never agreed and is less likely to be now post brexit.
As for other things like bans ,not sure .
But i'm keeping my Uk licence for the foreseeable.

Do people on here actually think that could be any significant impairment to your coordination and reactions the day AFTER smoking a joint? Really?

Not followed the thread so only stating a fact

Pretty sure tests on pilots found this 24 hours after one joint.
Not followed the thread so only stating a fact

Any evidence for this Junkyfact?

Crash culpability studies have failed to demonstrate that drivers with cannabinoids in the blood are significantly more likely than drug-free drivers to be culpable in road crashes - This is of course arbitrary in light of the current laws - I'd say driving stoned is stupid - The reality though is that many people from many walks of life do activities that require complex levels of spacial awareness and athletism to a top flight level whilst stoned.. So maybe the wider debate should be more focused on the socio-political nuances of prohibition?

yes but seeing as you asked so nicely find it yourself 😉

Wow 15 seconds on google later

TOP TIP: You could have googled just as easily as you got shitty
I dont make shit up on here and if i am wrong on factual matters I will accept it.
I am sure you will follow this lead as you seem the charming factual friendly type
🙄

.

Junkyard - lazarus

Pretty sure tests on pilots found this 24 hours after one joint.

To be fair though, other tests on pilots have [i]not[/i] found this after 24 hours.

<oops, edit, your link includes that information>

There must be a reason why the illegal level is set to whatever it is....it can't be entirely arbitrary

Habitual users of substances that impair driving are a higher risk than those that don't. This is why dvla now do the cdt test which looks at previous levels of alcohol consumption. A binge the night before won't increase the cdt value (even if the blood alcohol level is still over the limit for driving) but it will pick up the pattern of drinking a month or so previously.
Obviously this doesn't have any bearing on the op but it does demonstrate the thinking from driving authorities. So whether or not the op was impaired when he was pulled over, his doobie every day puts him in a higher risk category as far as the authorities are concerned. Risk to himself and other road users.

Because it is not easy to regulate your intake.

I'd bet my driving licence on having regulated my usage sufficiently that passing that blood test right now wouldn't be a problem.

TBH I'm in the throw the book at you camp.

If you've smoked every day for the past two weeks, I can't imagine you've left long enough before driving each and every time, there aren't enough hours in the day (literally if junkyards like is correct).

thisisnotaspoon - Member

If you've smoked every day for the past two weeks, I can't imagine you've left long enough before driving each and every time, there aren't enough hours in the day (literally if junkyards like is correct).

Unless he just didn't drive much in that period, which is what I took from it.

There must be a reason why the illegal level is set to whatever it is....it can't be entirely arbitrary

http://www.wakingtimes.com/2015/10/30/first-of-its-kind-study-shows-cannabis-has-little-to-no-significant-effect-on-driving/

Habitual users of substances that impair driving are a higher risk than those that don't. This is why dvla now do the cdt test which looks at previous levels of alcohol consumption. A binge the night before won't increase the cdt value (even if the blood alcohol level is still over the limit for driving) but it will pick up the pattern of drinking a month or so previously.

So, does mean that if you are an alcoholic and stopped while driving, but not over the limit, you will lose your licence as you are more likely to drive drunk than someone who isn't an alcoholic? Sounds sensible if a little presumptuous.

Someone said something about only trendy middle class people thinking driving stoned was ok. I suspect some people from other classes don't give a shit about it either. I'm wondering if the statement was made by an aristocrat or an unfashionabe member of the working classes. I'm sure if the working classes could let go of their prejudices and tried a little bit harder they too could buy soft drugs, fashionable clothes and a car.

I'm in agreement that if it was drunk driving reactions would be different, but if the tests don't actually prove a driver is stoned, then they aren't really very good. Unless you think druggies shouldn't be allowed to drive ever.

I'm fed up with smelling the stuff everywhere, I bought a house the people in the street smoke it all day (luckily I don't live there but I have got to sell it on eventually), I've just been to the beach some guy was smoking a joint whilst playing with his kids. I went in the shop at a holiday park yesterday a couple stank of it and the woman was out of her tree. Either legalise it and get some tax from it or clamp down on it. It's ridiculous.

@ LAT: I understand that the cdt test is used to see if someone can get their licence back after being banned for drunk driving. It's not a roadside test. A case one of my colleagues heard about was where a person had filled in some forms for dvla that indicated they might be an at risk driver, so they were asked to have the cdt test, which came back raised and confirmed this. So they then weren't able to get the licence back until the cdt test was normal (memory a little sketchy in those details but that was the gist of it)

[quote>

Wow 15 seconds on google later

TOP TIP: You could have googled just as easily as you got shitty
I dont make shit up on here and if i am wrong on factual matters I will accept it.
I am sure you will follow this lead as you seem the charming factual friendly type

Have you actually read that document?

It's full of phrases like "suggesting" and "some evidence". The author has not performed any "tests" himself and references other studies.

Looks like someone has their own agenda. The dramatic cover photograph suggesting the airports are full of pilots skinning up before getting in their planes, is clearly meant to shock the Aussie Daily Mail readers.

Unless he just didn't drive much in that period, which is what I took from it.

He needs to drive every day to get arround for work?

, but if the tests don't actually prove a driver is stoned, then they aren't really very good.

I thought someone posted up saying they tested for the active THC compound, not the metabolite? In which case it seems perfectly valid.

I can happily drink 4 pints and not be 'drunk' just as you could smoke a spliff and not be 'stoned', you'd not drive under either circumstances though.

The OPs defence seems to revolve around not knowing what the limit was, how high he was the day before, or how quickly his body metabolises the drug, and that he's got fast reaction times because he can ride a bike faster than his mates. Ignorance of the law isn't a defence, and in this context ignorance is a valid synonym for stupidity.

and the money made from the sale of the drug is legit, taxed of course and doesn't fund any other criminal activity ......

Unless you think druggies shouldn't be allowed to drive ever.

I don't think I'd have an issue with that

thisisnotaspoon - Member

The OPs defence seems to revolve around .................. Ignorance of the law isn't a defence, and in this context ignorance is a valid synonym for stupidity.

What are you talking about.......what defence ?

The OP isn't on trial here. He didn't ask people whether they thought he was guilty or not, he didn't ask for their judgements or opinions.

He asked two questions :

[i]"Has anyone any experience of this...?"[/i]

And :

[i]"What is the likelihood of my blood THC content being below 4nanogram?"[/i]

Have you any experience and/or do you know the answer to the second question ?

Come on, you know - a superiority complex gold mine is on offer. 🙂

Throw the [s]book[/s] haribo at 'im!

(Alpin, try not to stress. Sorry you've got to wait so long for a decision, but based on absolutely nothing other than a random opinion, I reckon it'll be fine).

Many more folk drive hungover.

The limit set in Germany is lower than that in Switzerland. 1-4ng in Germany, 3ng in Switzerland. Weed is easy to get hold of in Switzerland and the police are not overly interested.

I know when I'm high. Trust me, I've had enough experience to know.

I don't drive daily. Very rarely do I need to drive to work. I'm fortunate that most of my workshop/customers are less than 15km away. On the rare occasion I do drive to work I'll often throw my bike in the back and ride home or get a lift back to town with a colleague.
Often the van will sit there for a fortnight or more without being moved.

I've not got a problem with being caught. It is more the art of testing that have/am likely to have a problem with.

I fear my fat cells are full of redundant THC.

I've smoked for so long that I don't see having a smoke any different to having a glass of wine or a beer in the evening. Whether you agree is down to you.

As stated, I wouldn't knowingly get behind the wheel stoned. I might have a shandy with a meal if I'm driving,but more often than not I'll have a mango juice (#rockstar).

I don't think of myself as a criminal for smoking. I do think that all drugs should be regulated.

Even as a teenager I was never one for smoking in public spaces (other than the graveyard... Quiet,and a tap for filling buckets/bongs was handy).

Spoke to another acquaintance who despite having smoked few hours before being tested had levels so low that it wasn't taken any further.

Just chatted to an old friend at the wedding and his brother got well and truly done despite not being a regular user and having smoked three days previously before being tested.

There doesn't seem to be a hard and fast rule with regards to the effectiveness of testing. In fact, so far from those I have spoken to those that are/were heavy users and have been tested their results have come back negative. Those that are infrequent users have been stung.

Despite the interest from the desperate to be offended on your behalf, I'm not having a go at you. I don't think using cannabis is any worse than using any number of legal things.

I do think that using it everyday leaves you open to exactly the kind of situation you find yourself in, and will also blunt your appreciation of how it may or may not affect you.

...I would also be concerned about why you feel the need to use it everyday; that's not recreational use, more like a coping mechanism.

Smoking it will already have caused serious lung damage, and that's the biggest long term effect that would worry me.

I hope you get away without much in the way of censure, but 'ave a word with yourself before you need to.

I fear the hand wringing and naysayers will come out in the morning for you on here though Good luck fella

You weren't wrong 🙁

crikey - Member

Despite the interest from the desperate to be offended on your behalf, I'm not having a go at you.

Who is "desperate to be offended" ?

Smoking it will already have caused serious lung damage, and that's the biggest long term effect that would worry me.

What's that got to do with the question alpin is asking ? Do you think that he's never heard the claim that cannabis might be harmful ?

I feel completely unoffended by your comments btw, I just wonder why the need to lecture him. And why some people seem to think that he's on trial here.

I just wonder why the need to lecture him. And why some people seem to think that he's on trial here.

You're new here aren't you?

(I know you're not ernie but you get my gist 😉 )

I wonder why some feel the need to defend him, he's not on trial.

What you having for tea ernie? Is it taking a long time to cook?

Alpin how much do you smoke and how often? Have you spoken to anyone about your addiction?

I love STW yesterday we had a thread where you were the worst thing since a baby robbin had his face stoved in for using more than a pinch of salt, or heaven forbid a stock cube bought from the supermarket!

Today you're a member of the professionally offended if you think a habitual cannabis user is maybe not the best person to be judging whether or not he was under the influence when pulled over and failed a roadside drug test?

Drac - Moderator

I wonder why some feel the need to defend him, he's not on trial.

Who's defending him ?

I said at the start of the thread : [i]"I don't approve of the use of narcotics, I don't much like alcohol either"[/i]. But only in response to "Wow.... Was expecting a backlash".

Personally I think he's an idiot. But I don't see why I would need to tell him that since he's not asking me what I think - I'm sure he's not in the least bit interested in what I think.

He's asking has anyone any experience of this and what is the likelihood of his blood THC content being below 4nanogram.

EDIT : [i]" But I don't see why I would need to tell him that since he's not asking me what I think"[/i]. Actually it's more than that - I think he's got enough shit on his plate without receiving lectures. So yes perhaps I am defending him. In different circumstances I might tell him he's an idiot. But with potentially losing his job and having to leave the country another tact might be appropriate.

You're stoned ernie...

[quote=alpin ]I know when I'm high. Trust me, I've had enough experience to know. You really need to stop repeating/thinking like that - I've heard it so many times from folk who've been drinking alcohol (and said it myself) 😆

Hora is everyone who drinks alcohol an addict as well? Have you spoken to anyone about your bigotry?

enfht - Member

Hora is everyone who drinks alcohol an addict as well? Have you spoken to anyone about your bigotry?

Alpin sounds like your textbook functioning addict tbh. Or at the very least, incredibly habituated. Addict's an alarming word but addiction's out there all over the place, what matters isn't the tickbox, it's how you live with it.

FWIW, I love cannabis & really wish it was legal in the UK. It should be available on prison canteens at least.
We don't get weed in UK prisons anymore because it can be tested for quite easily & cheaply, also the remnants/evidence/residue or whatever It's called can stay in the body for up to 30 days.
Everyone's on 'spice' now which is screwing people up beyond belief.
You lot however, won't hear about that or even give a shit.

So it should be legal because if it's not people will do something worse?

Drugs in prison is a failing on so many levels. That it's crap enough at stimulating rehabilitation that inmates resort to psychoactives for escapism, that security is sub par to name a couple.

But legalising one thing to prevent something else? There's probably a million straw men to be had there in other examples, but why would legalising weed help in prisons help any situation, with the possible reason that they'd just be high/stoned for their sentence which doesn't sound either productive or punishing, why not just offer them sedation to make the time pass quicker too?

I can't help but feel you're getting a very easy ride from the STW 'cool' kids, one would assume that if it had been a drink drive issue you may not have the same.

No, I don't think he was likely to be impaired at the time of testing.

World Anti-Doping Agency classifies THC as a performance enhancing substance - By this yardstick would not a professional racing driver get banned for trying to gain an unfair advantage? But for the civilian motorist THC is being cited an impairment and thus as irresponsible and dangerous?

But legalising one thing to prevent something else? There's probably a million straw men to be had there in other examples, but why would legalising weed help in prisons help any situation,

Why not legalise it to prevent something else? I work as a 'screw' & see what happens every day. Have you any idea at all of the problems that NPS causes? I do, but why don't you tell me.

By this yardstick would not a professional racing driver get banned for trying to gain an unfair advantage? But for the civilian motorist THC is being cited an impairment and thus as irresponsible and dangerous

Presumably because it's not considered a good idea that "civilian motorists" drive like professional racing drivers.

Decreased anxiety and fear might be a good idea for professional racing drivers but personally I would prefer that other road users maintain a healthy level of anxiety and fear.

Why were you stopped?

Was an Allgemeineverkehrskontrolle, better known to us as a random stop. no reason to stop us as such.

[url= https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=Allgemeineverkehrskontrolle&rlz=1C1GGGE_en-gbGB480GB480&oq=Allgemeineverkehrskontrolle&aqs=chrome..69i57&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8 ]2nd link down...[/url]

Random stop.... We had just cleaned the van, drove 100m and the Cop car was behind us. Totally random
Asked him whether it was because of my driving or something with the van,but no.

Random stop.... We had just cleaned the van, drove 100m and the Cop car was behind us. Totally random
Asked him whether it was because of my driving or something with the van,but no.

Good chance the stop was "intelligence based" then. Sounds like they were waiting for you.

Random stop.... We had just cleaned the van, drove 100m and the Cop car was behind us. Totally random

Good chance the stop was "intelligence based" then. Sounds like they were waiting for you.

You sound paranoid, smoking too much maybe...

Good chance the stop was "intelligence based" [s]then[/s] man. Sounds like they were waiting for you dude.

You sound paranoid, smoking too much maybe...

I've never smoked dope - not even when I lived in Holland. I did however also live in Bavaria and random traffic stops didn't seem all that common. Certainly not ones where they'd go as far as a piss test. What can happen is that someone has smelled dope from the OP and had a word with the police, who've then followed up with a pseudo-random stop.

We really should have crowdfunded this to pay the fine or just buy some more dope...

[img] [/img]

I think i passed the "close your eyes touch your nose/close your eyes bring your finger tips together/walk along a line one foot in front of the other".

FWIW, I love cannabis & really wish it was legal in the UK. It should be available on prison canteens at least.
We don't get weed in UK prisons anymore because it can be tested for quite easily & cheaply, also the remnants/evidence/residue or whatever It's called can stay in the body for up to 30 days.
Everyone's on 'spice' now which is screwing people up beyond belief.
You lot however, won't hear about that or even give a shit.

[quote=CountZero ]I think i passed the "close your eyes touch your nose/close your eyes bring your finger tips together/walk along a line one foot in front of the other".
If it's any consolation, I'm pretty damned certain I'd fail that stone cold sober!
A g/f used to gently mock my lack of poise and balance!
She had taken ballet lessons for years and karate as well, but she had a valid point.

Can you juggle tho

do the dutch have an issue with stoned drivers? Or the Portuguese?

the only research I have seen on cannabis and driving showed little but some detriment - far less than drink driving. Perhaps a similar level of impairment to driving when tired. Also the mistakes tended to be less dangerous ones - such as driving too slowly, stopping at green traffic lights that sort of thing. The problem with post crash testing is that you cannot separate out cannabis from other stuff they have in their system as polypharmaceia is common or having had a drink as well. Drink and cannabis is a deadly combination on the roads tho. Even levels of drink that would be legal, when combined with cannabis makes for significant impairment

As for the powers that be keeping drugs out of prisons - you think they don't try? Its an impossible thing to stop and along with the synthetic spice there is also a significant heroin problem as heroin only is detectable for a very short time, cannabis for weeks. and you need a far smaller quantity of heroin so its easier to smuggle in. So bored inmates take heroin as its far less likely they will be caught.

ON driving there are two issues - driving whilst impaired and driving with above a certain level in your blood. I believe in England now there is roadside testing for cannabis and other drugs and there are prescribed limits but its really not clear if you are significantly impaired at the limit.

I have seen stoned drivers pass the impairment tests easily

Even astronauts get stoned

We were warned about the dangers of spice at "the talk" given at my son's school when he entered y9 I think it was. An ex copper who said to hope that your son gets into weed because it's far less dangerous than legal highs and especially spice.

thing is there is only a market for these "legal" ( no longer) highs because of our stupid prohibition laws.

Look at the dutch and Portuguese experiences to see that being relaxed about cannabis leads to far less problem drug use.

[quote=tjagain ]thing is there is only a market for these "legal" ( no longer) highs because of our stupid prohibition laws.
Look at the dutch and Portuguese experiences to see that being relaxed about cannabis leads to far less problem drug use.

Maybe, or maybe there's a difference in the culture? Clearly we have problems here with abuse of a quite legal drug - I'm sure we're not unique in that, but neither is it a universal problem.

Portugal went from a very punitive approach to complete decriminalisation - and a few years in the problems with drugs in their society is much less than it was.

Prohibition and "the war on drugs" has failed. A harm reduction and healthcare based approach is proven to reduce problems with drug use.

Some of you lot would love it over here. Get caught with a trace in your system and it's pretty much an immediate 12 month driving ban with 3 monthly testing throughout the ban. Fail a test and your ban starts again. Miss a test and it goes out another 3 months.......

One of my team got done about 10 years ago. Had to tell me as he sometimes has to drive cars on the public highway for work. This meant it had to go on his file, it's just a tick box, yes or no for vehicle/factory gate access. Probably 95% of the people in the company have a no. But because his changed everyone wanted to know why. HR, my boss, factory manager, everyone who could see the change, most of them wanted to sack him. Including the guy who was still on a suspended sentence for alcohol related violence..... not his first either.
In hindsight, I'd have just changed his work orders so he didn't have to drive.
AFAIK he had 8 "random" drug tests in the two odd years he still worked for me (all passed). No one else had any, out of a dozen or so.

the only research I have seen on cannabis and driving showed little but some detriment - far less than drink driving. Perhaps a similar level of impairment to driving when tired. Also the mistakes tended to be less dangerous ones - such as driving too slowly, stopping at green traffic lights that sort of thing

They must have been either using very weak cannabis or biased research then, in my own very limited experience leaving a motorway service area via the entry slip road & riding a motorbike convinced that you have a puncture but not stopping because you don't want you pillion to realise how stoned you are = pretty impaired & dangerous.

I did once see some proper acedemic research on this but can't find it now
I apologise for the mail link but IIRC the site changes it. NOt hugely good research but gives an idea. Of course these people were concentrating on driving well - its possibly the lack of concentration that causes issues so this test will not be reliable.

"Then Evans started driving. After smoking the small amount of pot, he was more than five times the legal limit with a reading of 26 nanograms but drove normally.

Underberg also measured above the limit with a 21.7 nanograms. But his driving, while a little slower than normal, was excellent, Jackson said."

http://www.****/news/article-2281102/Drivers-stoned-road-test-evaluate-Washingtons-marijuana-DUI-laws-entertaining-video.html

Fifth gear also did some testing with the same results. Can't find the video

Alpin, easier said than done but worrying will not change or help in the slightest - so don't. Occupy your head by planning for the worst and expect that to happen. Chances are it wont come to that but if it does just execute your plan. Pinkies crossed for ya maaaan!

p.s As a recent member of the non-smoking gang (6 weeks or so) i had conducted many of my own tests over 25+ years. My conclusion matches tjagain somewhat - on the odd occasion i drove after a smoke (several hours after btw) i drove like i'd just passed my test. Slow steady and even did the [i]passing the wheel through the hands thing on corners[/i] that i never do. This sedate pace was coupled with many years of driving/observation experience (in car/bike/motorbike) so i believe i was driving better. You might argue that my brain was addled (and i could fly etc) that's why i thought like this, but i don't believe this to be the case. I'm sure if measured accurately, my reaction may have been slightly slower than normal - but i was driving a lot slower/smoother than normal (and i generally smooth anyway (queue the swooning 😀 ). Not because i couldn't go faster - i was happy going slow and trying to be the perfect driver. In the right dosage (weak) it made me concentrate more. I didn't attempt to drive if heavily stoned.

Or maybe you were doing like some drink drivers do and overcompensating to try and hide the fact you had been smoking weed.

Drac - yes he probably was being more cautious because he had been smoking - but both the test I posted above ad the fifth gear test showed that unlike drunk drivers stoned drivers drove reasonably well and cautiously. co ordination is not impaired until you reach very high levels. a similar test with alcohol showed obvious impairment even below the (english) limit

The blood levels were brought in in the UK at least because even folk who were obviously stoned did not fail the impairment test. I have seen this for myself while working with the police. I think it is right that there is a blood level - it gives objective evidence. However what is not clear at all is what the levels should be. I think these are far too low but of course that is my opinion only.

on the odd occasion i drove after a smoke (several hours after btw) i drove like i'd just passed my test. Slow steady and even did the passing the wheel through the hands thing on corners that i never do. This sedate pace was coupled with many years of driving/observation experience (in car/bike/motorbike) so i believe i was driving better.

I know several drinkers who argue the same 😯 but I prefer your...

You might argue that my brain was addled

Anyway OP good luck with sorting the dependency out. That seems to be the most important issue as others have noted already.

I know very little about weed, but I'd perhaps posit that:

a) Comparisons with alcohol are probably unhelpful, a straw man even. They're different drugs with different effects.

b) I'd have thought that the best [i]objective[/i] judge of degree of impairment is the person using the drug? It's almost Dunning-Kruger, the nature of an impairment is that it also impairs your ability to analyse / recognise it.

Could be wrong on both counts, just my idle musings.

Everyone's on 'spice' now

How on earth is it getting in in sufficient quantity that "everyone" is on it? I can sort of understand it in dribs and drabs, surreptitiously palming it during visiting or something. But this would suggest it's happening on a much larger scale?

Something else I know little about I suppose, my only knowledge of the prison service is based on Prisoner: Cell Block H.

(and WTF is spice?)

spice is a very potent synthetic cannabinoid that until recently was legal to sell.

Drugs are regularly brought into prisons by a variety of methods - from someone "plugging" some ie concealing it in a body cavity and deliberately getting locked up ie having a warrant out for them and then presenting at a police station then going into jail and selling it / passing it to the boss to drone deliveries to throwing it over the fence to almost anything you can think of.

drone deliveries

😯 Seriously? Wow.

Yup http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-36302136

all the kids are on Spice now.
[img] [/img]

Totally pointless comparing it to alcohol to weed, different drugs with different laws.

Drones is for posh prisons tennis ball over the wall is far more common. Privatisation of prisons means low staff levels so the wardens can't control the drugs getting in.

A couple of interesting documentaries on iPlayer about Spice and Prison.

[url= http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b07prjfm/life-inside-wandsworth-prison ]http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b07prjfm/life-inside-wandsworth-prison[/url]

[url= http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/p03ny2n5/the-last-days-of-legal-highs?suggid=p03ny2n5 ]http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/p03ny2n5/the-last-days-of-legal-highs?suggid=p03ny2n5[/url]

hmm, obviously no sympathy for anyone driving while impaired by drink or drugs, however if the THC test really does test for historic use rather than how ****ed up you are at the time of testing then that's a pretty messed up test.

I spoke to a few lads yesterday who have been in a similar situation.

One heavy user who had 7ng in his blood, received massive fines and a two year ban. The whole ordeal ended up costing him around 200,000€ when lost earnings are taken into account.

I've got a few recommendations of lawyers who specialise in drug driving. Will try and get an appointment with one of them before the test results come back. Want to be prepared.

One idea floating around my head is to go along to the town hall and deregister and disappear from Germany.