Inspectors can offer meth and other drug manufacturing tests without a lab...

George, what use is a radon test where a low radon test doesn’t mean a radon free home either?

Radon similarly can get false negatives much easier than false positives. I know more about radon than almost anyone on earth and it is close to impossible to get a false positive with a radon test. The radon had to come from somewhere. It is pretty easy to get a false negative with a radon test, often with the intentional help from the seller if you know what I mean :roll: .

Anyway, despite the ease at which radon reports can be falsely negative… about 15,000 inspectors in North America offer radon testing services and have for nearly 20 years now.

I would think if any residue was found in the building, and after a lab test confirmed the findings, an industrial hygienist would be the one who would make clean up recommendations or what ever.

But I am going to look into this further…education first, because I think there would be a call for these tests, especially in rental, or commercial rental (hotel) properties.

Okay…and, like a radon test, you would report your results to your client, right?

And, three months after you report to your client that there was no evidence of radon and no evidence of meth…his child is poisoned from chemical residue he picked up while crawling on the floor.

I think my client, in his grief and anger, might forget all about my 62 pages of Inspectvue disclaimers, at that point. Don’t you?

Almost all tests inspectors do are tests that look for the presence of something… but don’t guarantee the absence of it.

A WDO inspector looks for termites, but can’t possibly say that a home is termite free?

A low radon test doesn’t mean that a home doesn’t have radon.

A septic dye test helps an inspector find defects in a septic system, especially if he sees red dye all over the back yard, but that test doesn’t guarantee a perfect septic system.

Do you ever say a home is “cleared of all leaks” simply because you looked for leaks and didn’t find any?

James, I explained in the show how I would reveal my findings to my client and I think it one of the smartest pieces of advice I’ve ever given.

I’d take a picture of the detector and give it to the client (just like I’d give them a radon lab report only, and nothing more). I think you probably understand why. The client hasn’t paid me to analyze or surmise.

Personally, I think you have given much better advice than this.

Technicalities aside, you tested for meth for a fee and provided him a negative test result that he went by to decide to buy the house. His kid died as a result of a chemical that you charged to seek and your test did not find. End of story.

Actually, we don’t test homes for meth, we test door knobs. And yes, I can clear a door knob as drug free with this test IMHO.

Anyway, can anyone tell me how testing for meth is any different from testing for mold, radon, or carbon monoxide?

Mould is a very good example. Just because you didn’t find it does not mean that it is not lurking behind a wall. Your test may not have found it but when the lawyer gets you on the stand the same question will be asked; “If you started to look for mould why didn’t you conduct a complete examination up to industry standards?”
Or are you suggesting that we do the test and then present it to the client with a statement that although we did not find any traces of drugs they may still exist? ( which pretty much reduces the value of the test to zero).

I know one of the Hotels I inspected last week was a drug house, the only people coming and going were riding bikes, using that property as an example, I think if I had the education, and the knowledge to do the portion of the test which just confirms residual remnants being in a room, the buyer-investor would have gone for the testing (paid), probably to a great degree, since he was planning on renovating the property and getting rid of the druggies, but I know after my lengthy conversation regarding what his initial concerns were about the inspection he wanted (scope of work) - Drug testing was not mentioned, but if I knew what I know now just from reading what Kris & Nick posted in the NACHI-TV I would have said something about testing to my client and he probably would have wanted it done.

Right on, Nick!

Remember, the authorities agree that only 10% of meth labs have been discovered.
So, 90% are still unidentified.
Plus, there’s a lot more structures that have been poisoned by meth use than were ever used as a lab, and my lab tells me that many use houses have higher ppms than some labs.
Large labs are, by and large, a thing of the past. Stuff comes up out of Mexico and is distributed across the U.S. far more cheaply now. Far less risk.

Wanna hear some #'s?? Approx 1 in 50 houses I inspect either are methed up, or are under serious enough suspicion that they get tested.

Get your head out, people. Maybe you agree with testing, maybe you don’t, I really don’t care, but you’d be a damfool to buy a house today without testing for it.
I’ve been methed, molded, & monoxided, and meth ain’t no picnic.

I’ve posted the following info dozens of times on this board - not because I’m trying to get you all to take up testing, tho it’s not a bad idea, but because I want to save some fellow NACHI member’s life:

Mike Cooper - Structural Narcotics Detection Service – had been in Kalispell MT but has recently moved to the Bozeman area. He does not have his website or email set up again, but can be called. He has a course you take before using his lab services, to be certified to do the sampling. I’ve always been happy with his service; tell him Russ sent you!
SNDS
Mike Cooper
P.O. Box 556
Belgrade MT, 59714

406-250-3970

Cheap swab tests are available here. http://scottcompany.com/p-mrs.htm They don’t give you any legal documentation, but are cheap enough to help you figure out WHERE to do the lab swab tests. Also, my experience is that these may give you false positives or false negatives. When you’ve got a home purchase hinging on your say-so, that’s a lot of liability to assume. That’s why I use Mike’s lab.

I’ve been discussing with Mike Cooper the possibility of using some of the filter-type paper that is used for swabs in his test, wrap it around the end of my Pro-Lab air sampling tube, and let that puppy run on high for about 10 minutes, next time I have a confirmed or strongly suspected house.
That s#it is in the air and should be able to leave some type of residue on the swab paper. It does, in my lungs & bloodstream! That, in my opinion, is the next generation of meth testing . . . and I hope somebody steps up to the plate with it.

Charles,

No, I do not use these in every building…they are too expensive. I’ve only been hired once to perform a drug inspection and I charged them $200.00 and found traces of cocaine in a kitchen pantry.

Hmmm, they don’t advertise their pricing on their web site any longer. I can’t remember what I paid per test, but it was roughly $120.00 for three tests. I still have two in stock.

Russell, what is the cost for the lab work per sample? thanx, Chuck.

Chuck, I generally do 2 samples ($96?) for $245.
A single, I think, is about 55.
Call Mike to be sure.

Thanx Russell.:slight_smile:

You bet, Chuck!

yep, saw a neat one yesterday.
They say in Orangeville you cannot drive 5 km without passing a pot house.

Dale,
I think this is an excellent requirement. A little education will be a big benefit before we all get in over our head.

As drugs are becoming more of an issue, it is like Nick said about radon, many inspectors offer it. WE should be trained and offer it as an addon service.
The house I looked at yesterday had some nice grow lights with special tranformers hanging in the basement and mold on every wall in the house. hmmmmmmm…