By Tiffany Raasch
Welfare drug testing is a topic that doesn’t get enough attention as it should. By definition, the welfare program is, “state regulated programs for those who live under the minimum accepted level means as determined by each state government” (Welfare Info). So people that are in need of extra money, get benefits from the state and federal levels of government to be able to support themselves and/or family. Something that people don’t realize is that some people abuse this privilege. One way would be buying alcohol and/or drugs. Welfare does not cover these certain items, and if people have enough money to purchase these items, then they can pay for their own food.
According to, “ISideWith.com”, 74% of 100,662 American voters said that individuals should be getting drug tested if they are on the Welfare program. This is because of opportunity costs. If you are in the welfare program, you have to give up some items that you may really want, but can’t afford and don’t need in order to live. You have to weigh your options, either feed your family, or smoke cigs. You can’t have both in this situation.
On the other hand of the spectrum, the prices of the drug tests are not balancing out with the conclusions. For example, the 10 states that require drug testing for Welfare and TANF individuals/families, found that only 321 tests came back positive after spending $850,909.25 on them. By spending this much money on only having 321 tests come back positive, it’s not worth it. States need to realize their opportunity cost and either stop the testing or find a more inexpensive way of testing people. Money is being wasted on something that doesn’t require as much money as the states are putting into these tests. For the people that abuse the program and take it for granted, ruin it for rest of the people who actually need the money and want to use it correctly. Then again, we do live in America where many people will do anything to get money, but not put in any effort to try and earn it.
Cited Sources:
Legislatures, National Conference of State. "Drug Testing for Welfare Recipients and Public Assistance."Drug Testing for Welfare Recipients and Public Assistance. N.p., n.d. Web. 04 Oct. 2016.
State, By. "Welfare Programs." Overview. N.p., n.d. Web. 04 Oct. 2016.
"Welfare Drug Testing Poll Results." ISideWith. N.p., n.d. Web. 03 Oct. 2016.
Covert, Bryce. "Drug Testing Welfare Recipients Is A Popular New Policy That Cost States Millions. Here Are The Results." ThinkProgress. N.p., 2016. Web. 02 Oct. 2016.
As someone who comes from a family who has been apart of some welfare problem or another throughout my life, I had never even considered drug testing. My family dynamic is not one of drug use and abuse, so according to your statistics we aren’t part of the outliers. I do agree, however, that drug tests should be given randomly and in an inexpensive manner to the programs. Welfare programs are underfunded as it is, large spending on something such as drug tests seems unnecessary, especially if it appears that a small percentage of people in welfare programs are drug and alcohol users. I would add to this though, with a suggestion for welfare programs moving forward. If a drug test comes back negative, kicking that person out on their own is not going to do much good at all. If drug testing is done in an inexpensive manner, saved money can be used to fund programs for people on welfare battling drug and alcohol addiction. They can’t fix the problem if nobody helps them get the tools do so. The welfare programs could do this.
ReplyDeleteI agree with this and does seem to becoming a bigger problem. It's almost like the government is paying for some people's drugs, alcohol and cigs which is a crazy thing to think about because of how much the government is trying to stop the drug problems. I really liked the fact on how the states spent $850,909.25 to only get 321 people to test positive on a drug test. I feel like there's better options like having them only use credit cards that track what they buy and only use cash when they need to, and with that having to send in a receipt. Something that I thought could have been a little better was the picture of the pie chart because I couldn't really understand what question was being asked or what the data represented. Overall, I really liked the piece and thought it was a relative and concerning topic.
ReplyDeleteI agree with this and does seem to becoming a bigger problem. It's almost like the government is paying for some people's drugs, alcohol and cigs which is a crazy thing to think about because of how much the government is trying to stop the drug problems. I really liked the fact on how the states spent $850,909.25 to only get 321 people to test positive on a drug test. I feel like there's better options like having them only use credit cards that track what they buy and only use cash when they need to, and with that having to send in a receipt. Something that I thought could have been a little better was the picture of the pie chart because I couldn't really understand what question was being asked or what the data represented. Overall, I really liked the piece and thought it was a relative and concerning topic.
ReplyDeleteI agree that it isn’t quite fair for the government to be giving people money that abuse it. However, it is not so easy to just say you don’t get the money if you spend it on drugs and alcohol. Drug testing people on welfare seems easy until you realize the money that goes into it. That is why West Virginia is trying to compromise. They currently are trying to pass a bill that drug tests those on welfare that are “suspicious” after given a questionnaire. This way, they wouldn’t have to spend the money to drug test everybody on welfare, but they still hope to weed out some of the welfare abusers. There are now 15 states that have a welfare drug test of some kind, and many are doing things like West Virginia trying to find a compromise. We have to find the right balance of saving taxpayer money and catching abusers of the welfare system- there is always a trade off.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete
ReplyDeleteAlthough only a small percentage of people on welfare are abusing drugs, I agree that welfare drug testing is a good idea because, like you said, if a person has enough money to buy drugs then they are not in need of government money. Although drug testing costs a lot of money, and would eventually cost the government the same (or even a larger) amount of money that it would if they just gave people the welfare money, I still believe that the marginal benefit of drug testing is more than the marginal cost. If the drug testing continued they may be spending a little more money, but they would be helping motivate people to stop their substance abuse, and they would be spending money to help stop drug use instead of promote it by giving addicts extra money to spend. Although welfare drug testing isn’t the best answer right now, I still think that it is a better answer than not drug testing while we continue to seek new and cheaper alternatives.
While drug testing people involved in the welfare program does have a purpose, because the money provided has been abused before for the purchase of drugs and alcohol, it is not really worth it in the long run. As you said, the cost of conducting these drug tests is way too expensive for the results they are getting. Maybe, it would be worth it if this was an actual outstanding problem, however only 312 tests showed up positive out of 10 states. I do not understand why the majority of American people would vote for this drug testing if it is not even that big of an issue. People think it is, but that is just them assuming that those in poverty make poor life choices, which is a whole other problem in itself. If this were to apply to all 50 states the total cost of this drug testing would come to about 4.2 million dollars, a large debt that Americans do not need. In my opinion, drug testing should not even be implemented into these programs because it is really the people in these programs life choices on what they do, and although it is not their money they are still causing negative effects by doing this (the ones that actually are) to themselves and in the long run will either realize their mistakes and seek help or die of overdose or health problems eventually. Also, what is even the punishment if one these tests came back positive for an individual? Do they just cut them from the program and allow them to starve to death or be homeless? Because that would not solve any problems either. So all in all, it is not worth it. Too expensive, too little of positive results, and an invasion of privacy too in my opinion.
ReplyDeleteI thought that this was a very interesting topic to write your article about. I actually did take the I Side With quiz a few months ago and when the question about Welfare Drug Testing, I was a bit unsure about what to answer. After finding out the definition of this situation, I naturally thought that yes, people should have to be tested because they really should be spending money on necessary items rather than drugs. I really liked comment that you made where you said that if people do not have enough money they will need to choose between eating or cigarettes, which unfortunately, could be a hard decision to make for certain people. So yes, doing drug tests would be beneficial, however, I never really considered the consequences of it. I did not realize how much money it took to run these tests, so I would want to know if there would be any way to decrease this price because yes, it is a good idea to run these drug tests, but the ultimate question is whether or not it is actual worth the price.
ReplyDeleteTIFF, I saw your title and got so excited to read this!! I loved the line that said "if you have enough money to purchase these items, then you can buy your own food." I literally almost laughed out loud in my silent econ classroom! But I had never actually thought of the money it takes to test these people, and whether or not it was worth the actual opportunity cost. My staunch conservative nature just always thought, "we need to be drug testing these people!" You do bring up a very good point, however I still think that the drug testing is worth the opportunity cost, as it would be weeding (haha, pun intended), out the people who won't use their welfare correctly, and therefore saving more money in the long run. Maybe they don't have to drug test on a consistent basis either, but a random one. That way more money can be saved by having to buy less drug tests, and nobody can prepare!
ReplyDeleteAlthough there are many wonderful points made in this piece, I think that there are also negative effects of implementing the drug tests. For instance, my mother is on disabilities for Crohn's disease, yet she still smokes cigarettes and weed in fairly large amounts. However, the disabilities check she receives every month is about $800. The fact that she uses these drugs does not mean that they are a priority to her, and she spends most (if not all) of the check very quickly just by buying groceries, gas, care products for our two dogs, and saving whatever small portion is left for emergencies. Bear in mind, my mother lives in Colorado along with my brother while my sister and I have lived here with my dad since 2012. So, when she runs low on the money she uses for bare essentials, my dad is left to fill the gap for her to live more comfortably. Yes, I know that some of the money that my father sends out goes towards the cigarettes and weed, which are not necessities. But, if the government were to lower, or even terminate the aid my mother gets, I can imagine that one of two things would be the result: 1.) my mother becomes homeless due to the lack of cash for what she needs, or 2.) my father would have to send more money, more frequently in order to help my mom live out there, which would result in us having much less than we do now.
ReplyDeleteSee, my mom doesn't use the money that she gets from the government to indulge in her drug habits. But if the drug tests were in place and if the money was reduced/confiscated as a consequence, it would simply end more negatively than positively. While I do agree that the idea behind the drug tests is a good one, I believe that there are more factors that come into play than if they are just users of the drugs. Factors like: is the money given to the recipient used to buy the drugs? What kind of drugs were they? Something fairly common like cigarettes? Or more severe like heroin? Does the recipient have an illness that allows them medical permission to use drugs to help the symptoms?
In conclusion, although the blog is well written with an interesting topic with many persuading points of evidence, I still think there are too many factors that vary from person to person in order to have a fair judgment in whether or not the drug tests are necessary for people on welfare.
The thought of people exploiting the system to spend money that they didn't earn on drugs sickens me. However, the thought of the government wasting money on things like welfare and ineffective drug testing also sickens me. The cost of those drug tests is disturbing and I think when given that figure, most taxpayers would agree. The one option that I never see is that we shouldn't spend any money on drug testing welfare recipients. Oddly enough, I think that would be a viable solution. First, if everyone is receiving the same amount, I think anyone has the right to spend that money on whatever they want. If they choose to starve themselves and get high, so be it. Eventually, if drugs are as bad as we've been led to believe, those welfare recipients who do indeed spend their money on drugs will either realize the error of their ways, or become a welfare recipient no longer. Therefore, if the welfare state is to persist, I think the best option would be to do away with the drug testing entirely.
ReplyDeleteAs students have mentioned in the comments above, I also believe that the drug tests should be randomized in order to save money on them, but still do their job of discovering people that are using. If it is done in a more arbitrary fashion, people would be less prepared for it which could potentially reveal more positive tests. However, these drug tests still probably wouldn’t reveal very many people that are using. Considering there were only 321 positive tests in ten states, it’s unlikely that there will be tens of thousands in others. It is still important that these drugs tests are implemented though because the opportunity cost of them outweighs the expenses. So, although there are both positives and negatives for the implementation of welfare drug tests, the positives outweigh the negatives and welfare drug testing should be expanded to all fifty states.
ReplyDeleteIt seems like a logical solution to this issue and I hadn’t really thought about it’s impact until I read this. Yet, it does seem that it is expensive and there needs to be a way to develop a more efficient and inexpensive way to test or continue with the way that everything is going right now. There are many people in need and those who choose to abuse the help that is given to them, do not deserve that help. It seems as though the data is not very conclusive based on these 10 states and maybe rather than a monthly screening or such, there could be an experiment done to find out if there really is an issue and just spend the money one time if there is not. Or if the results show that there is a large number of people on welfare whose tests came back positive, then action be taken on finding another way to test without the extra expense.
ReplyDeleteAs people collect welfare, it is almost inevitable that people are going to be abusing the system and taking advantage of what it gives them. In all honesty it really seems as if there is no good way around the topic of stopping people on welfare from using drugs. It costs the government more to do the test than it actually does to just give out the money so it is a lose lose situation. I also wonder what happens when somebody does test positive for a drug? Do they take them off of welfare all together and leave them with no help and no money? This seems to be a problems that will linger as long as our government distributes food stamps.Finding a better way to go at this topic such as a written questionnaire to find out more about the person receiving the stamps may be a good way to slim out the deserving and non deserving candidates.
ReplyDeleteAlthough only a small percentage of people on welfare are abusing drugs, I agree that welfare drug testing should be in place. As you said, if a person has enough money to buy drugs for themselves, they should not be in need of welfare money. Welfare money should be given to those who are in need of economic assistance and the money would be used purposefully to buy inferior goods. Drugs are very expensive, much more expensive than many items you would need from the grocery store, which comes to show that if you test positive for drugs, you are able to afford things you need, just you are choosing to substitute these goods for drugs. The welfare system, however, would probably continue to be abused even if all fifety states follow the drug testing protocal. There are a continuous ammount of loopholes in the government programs, which is very sad, considering many on the welfare program are in true need. Ultimitally, I feel that the drug testing would close one of the loopholes in welfare.
ReplyDeleteI agree with you that it will help stop the abuse of the welfare system, though not completely. Honest American taxpayers should not have to foot the bill for others' addiction, and forcing people to do that, through a flawed welfare system, is not right on the side of the government. Though this fix to the system may be expensive to fund, it would be beneficial to the American people and people who are honestly using the welfare system. Though there will still be abuse in the welfare system, mandatory drug testing would be a good start to help stop it.
DeleteThis is such a great topic to chose. My opinion on this piece is fluctuating immensely. In order for me to figure out if the $800,000 spent on drug testing is worth the cash, I would need to know how many people were drug tested that resulted in 321. If the percentage of positively drug tested people on welfare is higher than 15%, I think that this money is worth knowing who is going against welfare. Although many would argue that the opportunity costs of drug tests would be losing money to put towards additional welfare or to reduce our national debt with, the money in the long run saved by these drug tests could be tremendous for the government. It would slowly reduce the amount of welfare given. The opinion I can state without knowing specific numbers would be that drug testing citizens on welfare should be mandatory for two reasons: one being that the USA could gain a nonintellectual reputation of potentially "supplying its citizens with drug money". Although it is seen as 100% not true, words can be twisted and pins can be pointed at individuals. Reason number two is that it is justified to want to catch those who are abusing the government and what is it doing to save their lives. No one deserves such help if all they do is throw it away to live a low life in the dumps.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI love the topic, and certainly agree with you. Wasting pointless tax dollars on unnecessary testing. So what if someone is using drugs, they need to feed their families. However I don't believe we can give those people cash because of their drug habits, but maybe we can improvise something similar, but more effective to the food stamps program, so that way these people can't use their money on drugs but can still provide for their families.
ReplyDeleteI agree, if the government is giving the citizens money, they should use it responsibly, or they shouldn't get any; they also shouldn't be using the money they have to buy stupid things like alcohol and cigs. Yes, $800k is a lot of cash, but is it worth it in the long run? Does it balance out the money we would save by not giving those people welfare? In my opinion, the government should have a way to make sure the people are spending it responsibly, like giving them a grocery story card or something along those lines. Overall, I think the responsible people deserve the money, while the ones that use it to buy drugs and alcohol don't deserve any of it.
ReplyDeleteThis is a really good topic to debate against and towards. So many people can see both sides from the situation but I extremely agree that if you can pay for alcohol and drugs and not only use them, but abuse them, you can pay for your own everyday needs. Also agreeing with Rachel's comment, that the US could be known for supplying drug money. People already go through loop holes to be put on welfare and food stamps to get extra instead of truly trying and just take advantage of them. Also agreeing on the opposite side, with as many people who get these advantages use them to good use and the US would be wasting money on drug testing clean citizens. Unless this became an extreme problem in the future with many people using this to buy drugs and alcohol, the US should try something else to ensure the money is being out to good use.
ReplyDeleteI really like this topic because it forced me to think about other possible solutions. As you mentioned several times in your article- some people that are on welfare abuse the privilege by not spending the money given to them on items such as food and toiletries; basic living necessities. But instead spending it on useless items like cigarettes and alcohol. To prevent them from spending the money on the wrong things, why don't we help them in ways other than handing them money? We could put together more programs like soup kitchens to help feed them. And as far as providing them with toiletries; just directly provide them with the toiletries they need, rather than the money to go buy them. This way they do not have an option of "managing" this essentially "gifted" money.
ReplyDeleteThe entire topic revolving around welfare is definitely a valid one in American government presence. However, the claim that drug tests need to be done for the potential of use of tobacco are mislead. Cigarettes are perfectly legal, and every citizen over 18 has the right to purchase that. The government likely wouldn't discriminate over that. In addition, the cigarette tax, which varies per pack in each state, helps state and federal governments provide welfare with the income. Illegal drugs are a different story. However, being experienced as a cashier, the welfare system, while still being deserving of implementation, needs a slight reform. Many people have food stamps that probably shouldn't compared to even lower income families. It's a bit of a gray area, but certain actions need to be done to avoid abusing welfare besides legal drug testing.
ReplyDeleteReading through this, you covered a lot of topics that made me stop and read over several times, perceiving them in a different way pretty much every time. I agree with a lot of the points you stated. Specifically, the way the government sets up drug testing appalls me. There is a lot of funding going into it when there are so few people getting caught with drugs in their system-- the few that test positive are from marijuana. The real issue that we should be looking at is the fact that people can get past drug tests easily. Most people can either detox before their drug test, or they simply do drugs that don't show up in their system for drug tests after 24-49 hours, like cocaine, MDMA, PCP, LSD, heroin and crack in most cases. If people are smart--and if they are addicted they will be-- they will find a way around a drug test, therefore lowering the number of positive drug tests found and defeating the purpose of funding more drug tests in the future. On the other hand, people I know collect welfare because they don't have an income but they aren't lazy people. they work from home and have smaller incomes from that, that aren't regulated by the government. There are a lot of people who don't abuse the privilege to have and aid with their income, and the people who do shouldn't be taking away what they genuinely need. A solution to this might be to implement a system where cigarettes and unnecessary items are unable to be bought via welfare card or any form or government payment by the customer. I do have a lot of fluctuating opinions on that though, because I can see both sides of the story.
ReplyDeleteI think that the states shouldn’t have each person in the welfare program tested because by doing that then the states will have to cut something else in order to pay for all of the drug tests. Also hardly anyone would choose drugs over their family so not many people are going to be positive. Which means that the drug tests are a big and huge waste of money because that would cost of a 1 million buck on a drug test on everyone in the welfare program. However it makes since that people want everyone tested because they might just be in the welfare program just to get money to buy more drugs.
ReplyDeletereading through this, it seemed strange that welfare drug testing inst already in place all over the country. I constantly hear of how we need to regulate "government hand outs" better. As a country we are also facing a drug epidemic. I feel that if the drug testing were in place than we'd have less drug issues, and less people complaining. Those who consume drugs and receive welfare will now have to choose between witch is more important to them. This could be a very beneficial program on both ends of the respect. Yes, it does cost some money to drug test, however i believe that it is necessary before they receive help, to make sure they're not going to be abusing the money. Otherwise were just wasting money on drug addicts that could've been spent to make better roads?
ReplyDeleteAfter reading this blog post I really began to think about what you were saying here. As Americans in Pewaukee most of us do not even think about welfare or not having a roof over our heads when we go home at night. However as we begin to grow older we find that as a tax payer we are paying for much more than ourselves. We are also paying for others who in turn cannot pay for themselves. Essentially we are just giving free money away for a better cause which would make it understandable why people would want drug testing done. This would allow the payers to see who is wasting their hard earned money and who is not. Overall a good post Tiffany.
ReplyDeleteOverall I really liked your piece and agreed with what you said. If the people are receiving welfare because they can’t afford to buy things they need, and are using the money to buy drugs and alcohol, they aren’t using the money correctly. I believe that the drug test should be given out at random to lower the cost. If the the test comes back positive maybe instead of giving the people money to buy their own food and needs they be given the items directly.
ReplyDeleteI thought this was a very interesting topic that you researched. I had never thought about how much drug testing actually costs. It definitely tests our government’s economic knowledge to decide whether paying all that money for all those drug tests would be a valid choice. Another thing they could do other than drug test is send out a survey to all those on Welfare, have them fill out their necessary meal plan or pick what supplies they need, and then only allow them to purchase those items, or even set up a system where the items they selected are sent to them in the mail. It would decrease the cost of drug testing while still keeping most people in check.
ReplyDeleteI agree with you in terms of the controversy of the situation. While it would be beneficial to save the money that is being spent on the drug testing and put it towards other things such as the food that people need, I understand why states might feel it is necessary. Those that choose to spend their limited money on drugs rather than food are making their own decision. They weighed the opportunity cost and just chose that giving up food isn't that important. Since only 10 states require the drug testing, it would be interesting to compare how much extra money the other 40 have for other things such as food since they don't have to fund these drug tests. Ultimately if people are choosing to sacrifice food for drugs, it is their decision. While it might not be fair for them to be handed food when they're falsely prioritizing the opportunity cost, that's on them.
ReplyDeleteIt makes sense that people would misuse the Welfare Program as people are selfish and worry about themselves rather than a population as a whole. I believe that when working in a professional environment, people should be drug tested. People who are abusing drugs shouldn’t be working in a professional world because they should be taking their job seriously. Also, if people have a drug problem, they need help. By giving drug tests, it would better improve and shape an individual for their own benefit. If it’s a job that isn’t as serious for example, a fast food restaurant, I don’t believe drug tests are needed because it’s a minimum wage job so the expectations shouldn’t be as high compared to a higher authoritative job. For example, teachers, doctors, business sellers. All of these jobs hold high standards and deserve hard working people.
ReplyDeleteI agree with you in terms of the controversy of the situation. While it would be beneficial to save the money that is being spent on the drug testing and put it towards other things such as the food that people need, I understand why states might feel it is necessary. Those that choose to spend their limited money on drugs rather than food are making their own decision. They weighed the opportunity cost and just chose that giving up food isn't that important. Since only 10 states require the drug testing, it would be interesting to compare how much extra money the other 40 have for other things such as food since they don't have to fund these drug tests. Ultimately if people are choosing to sacrifice food for drugs, it is their decision. While it might not be fair for them to be handed food when they're falsely prioritizing the opportunity cost, that's on them.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThe government needs to be more efficient with their drug testing system. Having only 321 test return positive is quite a statement to how bad the system is. We should no doubt be drug testing those on welfare, but the amount of investment for such little return is appalling. We either have to stop the testing for now until more accurate drug testing methods become more available, or put more funding into finding a better system.
ReplyDeleteI definitely think that those who are on welfare should be drug tested because you want to make sure that the people that are included in the welfare system are not using the money that they get for drugs because that would just be a huge waste of time. I think that it should be done randomly but periodically because it would take a lot of time and money to get everyone on the welfare system tested. All of the money that is wasted on those to buy drugs is insane because they could have been used on something better for communities, like Jess said.
ReplyDeleteI agree that they should find a less expensive way to test people, so that we can afford to have this in effect. There needs to be some sort of regulation on drug use and welfare. People need to put their needs first, not their wants. If people would use common sense, they could use the money they're spending on drugs to help better their family.
ReplyDeleteI really love this topic and I agree with you. What stood out was when you mentioned more than once, about how some people aren't taking consideration when it comes to their money. In other words, they aren't taking the privilege when on wealth fair and instead, spend it on useless items that aren't very beneficial. Rather than giving them money, we should do something different because with the money given to them, they'll obviously go back and will spend it on drugs or alcohol; which isn't a good thing. Additionally, with the testing going on, so much money is being wasted into it when instead, that money could be spent elsewhere. People who abuse their privilege when on wealth fair, should not deserve being on it, rather the people who do need the help.
ReplyDeleteThis topic is definitely a controversial one. The opportunity cost needs to be taken into consideration here since so much money is being spent on these drug tests. It's also interesting to note, how many people actually showed up for the drug tests to make the outcome 321 people. If most people that showed up for tested positive then it may be worth it but if not then it's up for debate. Another consideration is to not give them any money for them to manage and potentially waste on drugs, and instead give them the necessities such as food and toiletries directly to them.
ReplyDeleteThis is an interesting topic and it is really surprising that many state governments wasted $850,909.25 on just drug testing. The problem is the government never realized that majority of people are misusing the opportunity in front of their eyes. Instead of spending on drug testings, the government should use the money to improve the welfare program; they should also pass some kind of law regarding the misuse of the money. I accept the fact that welfare individuals need to be drug tested but this testing is not impacting some people because they still keep using drugs(violating the opportunity costs). So therefore, the government should find an efficient way to drug test people with less cost.
ReplyDeletedot drug screen Speares Medical provides the best unique online medical tests kits like drug screening, drug test,urine test,alcohol test at cheap and affordable prices.
ReplyDeleteIndividuals using drugs or drink excessively are considered to have more performance problems, bad decision making and management skills, and memory or attention problems that reduce efficiencies and make redundancies. Source for more about kratom blog.
ReplyDeleteA great deal of people believe drug tests are utilised to kick out anyone found to use an illegal substance. For more information about drug testing visit here.
ReplyDeleteA favorite system of hair loss care is observed through the many unique goods on the current market, which likewise includes DHT shampoo alternatives. passing a hair drug test is easy
ReplyDeleteIf you've got short hair it's ideal to do any home remedy to eliminate any metabolite traces. Author is an expert of macujo method, click here for more interesting information.
ReplyDeleteIn general, the higher the quality of the product, the more reputable the manufacturer is. There are some companies that do not strictly adhere to international standards for purity and manufacturing quality, though. Want to know more about sarms for sale? Learn more here.
ReplyDelete