Safety and OSHA News

Men guilty of selling device to foil drug tests

Does your company require employees to pass drug tests? Now, there’s one less product on the market to help them cheat.

The makers of the Whizzinator have pleaded guilty in federal court to two conspiracy counts, putting an official end to their product.

The company owned by George Wills and Robert Catalano, Puck Technology, sold the device that helped men pass drug tests.

The Whizzinator is a prosthetic penis that comes with a heating element and fake urine. It was sold from 2005 through this year.

Federal prosecutors claim the product helped people circumvent federal workplace drug-testing programs. They cited customer testimonials on the company’s Web site, including one in which an employee bragged about using the device to pass a drug test required by Department of Transportation regulations.

The men will be sentenced in February and face up to eight years in prison and a $500,000 fine each.

The Whizzinator entered public consciousness three years ago when former Vikings running back Onterrio Smith was caught with one in an airport.

The device made news a second time when a couple asked a convenience store clerk in McKeesport, PA, to heat one in a store microwave so the fake urine would attain body temperature. The store clerk called police. The woman, who wanted the fake urine to pass a pre-employment drug test, pleaded guilty to disorderly conduct and agreed to pay to replace the store’s microwave.

OSHA regulations prohibit use of microwaves to heat food once bodily fluids have been in them.

Print Friendly

Subscribe Today

Get the latest and greatest safety news and insights delivered to your inbox.


  1. OK, after some serious consideration, and some insite by others, here is our question/statement … If I am reading this article correctly, the manufacturer of this perticular device are to be sentenced in February for creating this “device”. Well if that is true, the point that we would like to make here is: for every murderer using a gun or knife or even a bat, should the manufacturer of that “device” be jailed for making it? I guess the point that we are trying to make … when do we take responsibility for our actions and stop blaming everyone else?

  2. Mary- I would think that the manufacturer is responsible because the product has no viable use other than to commit a crime. A gun, knife, or bat has legal uses as well as the ability to be misappropriated for illegal use. This device, however, is in the same catagory as a bong, a crack pipe, or a suicide-assistance device. No viable use other than the commision of a crime. So, the owner/user of the device is guilty, but the manufacturer is an accessory to a crime. To not do so would be to say that someone who manufactures methamphetamine but does not personally use it is not doing anything wrong.

  3. Brian Donahue says:

    Mary makes a valid point however, the Whizzinator from how I understand the article, was made to “do wrong”. Meaning to hide or decieve for the purpose of personal gain by anyone buying it. The makers of this product knew from the beginning that it would be used to prevent a person from being caught at an act that would stop that personal gain. It also proves that humans will try anything they can to continue to do illegal drugs and keep working at flying planes, operating transportations buses or trucks, operating forklifts, or operating on your grandmother. I believe the decision was correct based upon the manufacturer wanting to help people do evil.

  4. What about a fuzz buster/ radar detector?

  5. Larry Maston says:

    Radar detectors are illegal in my state. Waterpipes (bongs) are legal to sell or purchase at “head” shops because they have a ligitimate use for tobacco smoking (theortically speaking). Once the bong is used for dope and has detectable residue, it becomes illegal drug paraphenalia.
    If I were a medical technician performing the chemcal analysis on the urine of a friend and, I falsified the test results so that my dope addict friend could get a job as a air traffic controller, would I be liable if my friend caused a catastrophic accident while working high? Would the medical clinic be liable? What if your family or friends were on the plane?

  6. OK- This is weird. I have never heard of Whizzinator or PUCK Technology! The company is responsible for selling the product for the reason they invented/sold it. They were breaking the law by enabling someone to pass a drug test. As Larry stated “my dope addict friend”. Come on people, there are people who use drugs that are NOT DOPE ADDICTS! Just as there are those “social drinkers” (legal) versus those DRUNKS. Not everybody who does drugs is a Dope Addict. I’m 57 years old and growing up, I thought MY GENERATION would be different. But we are not. My problem with Drug Testing is this: and by the way, no, I do not use drugs (including alcohol) as recreation or whatever.

    If I were to do 2 – 4 lines of Cocaine, do Meth, Drink, on a Thursday night, by Monday any of those drugs are OUT of my urine/blood. So if I have an accident on the job Monday, my drug tests comes back negative.

    If I were to smoke 2 – 4 joints (marijuana)*sp on a Thursday night, by Monday that POT is still in my urine/blood. So I have an accident on Monday and the POT shows up on my drug tests. I’m screwed, even though the POT I smoked Thursday night had NOTHING to do with my accident on the job on Monday. That high doesn’t last that long. And can you imagine how much money you could make if that HIGH lasted for 5 days!?!?

    Until science/technology comes up with a drug test that can be specific about WHEN I did the dope, I’m against. Even though yes, drugs are illegal. I still believe that as a tax paying AMERICAN I still have the right to do in my home whatever I want to do, as long as I am the ONLY VICTIM!

  7. I agree with much of what Gayle says. That is why I deliberately used the term “my dope addict friend” in my example. I was using the term “dope” as a general term. For the example, I was thinking more of opiates or stimulants but, I guess my earlier comment about bongs was misleading. It should be clear that a hardcore heroin or crack user is a danger to others and that it is wrong to help him get a job where his addiction endangers others.

    As far as marijuana and drug testing goes, I was a recreational smoker in the past and resented the fact that if I had had an incident at work, I could have been tested and terminated if my test was positive for pot. I agree that smoking weed on the weekend shouldn’t affect my work on Monday. (but let’s be honest, massive bong tokes Sunday night WILL affect you Monday morning.) The main reason I haven’t smoked in years is because I haven’t been satisfied at work and I am always looking for a better job. I know that I will be tested.

    That is the rub for me. I am currently in a position that manages others. I do insist upon a drug test. It’s not that I care if my co-workers bong toke on Saturday night. It just that the job applicant should know that they will be tested and should have the self control to abstain for a few weeks. If they cannot, I would be suspect of their maturity or of their sobriety.

    I too wish that there was a drug test that could establish the current level of intoxication and impairment, as opposed to past use. Saturday Night Live is actually funny after a few tokes and, I look forward to the day.

  8. Since when does a device have to have a lawful use before you manufacture it. Radar detectors are illegal in several states but if someone gets caught using it they get a ticket, but the manufacturer doesn’t. Should be the case here.

  9. Scooter says:

    These devices are no different than hair dye. Would your mind’s eye not speculate over someone with gray hair for a particular job? Say whatever PC thing you think is popular, but any human being processes judgements ,etc., based on initial appeal and subconsciously at that. Look it up.

    The point about the delay in disposal of residual THC is valid and should make drug tests unconstitutional as they play “favorites” with drugs. Even if a prescribed medication is the fault or contributor to an injury, it is still as detrimental as smoking pot on the weekend or whenever.
    One day, our people will wake up and recall that the constitution was set up to protect us and keep the government out of our bedrooms and living rooms. The day they give a breathalizer at the time clock to every single worker (blue or white collar) will be the beginning of the pinch. Then you might see things relaxed on testing.
    Same is true with tobacco and obesity. Obesity contributes to more death and illness than tobacco, but McDonalds is “in”, Philip Morris is “out”. Every state wants to tax the cigarette smoker, yet the cost driver amongst insurables is cholestorol, triglycerides, and overall weight versus health. Oh yeah, and bad drivers..dont forget them (you know who you are out there)….

  10. Guns have a other legitimate, legal and constitutional uses, wizzanator’s sole purpose is to defeat a legitimate and a marginally constitutionally legal test, so the gun argument is apples and oranges.

    The radar detector argument might hold water though…

  11. The thing about radar detectors is that they are manufactured in the states where they are legal and potentially used in states where they are not legal. So, we are getting into State law versus Federal law. I guess that it is comparable to the current medical marijuana situation here in California. It may also be comparable to current gun law in California. We are highly restricted in the type of weaponry and ammunition that the average citizen can own/possess. However, in some states, you can buy or own pretty much anything short of nukes.
    Tommy Chong was busted by the “Feds” because he was selling bongs over the internet *across state lines*. He might likely still be in business if he been operating a local headshop or, if he only sold and shipped to intrastate locations.
    Does this all relate to the Whizzinator? I don’t know. The article claims that someone was caught using the device to circumvent or “pass a drug test required by Department of Transportation (Federal) regulations”.
    The Whizzinator web site advertised the device for this specific use. ???????????

  12. I don’t believe that putting these two men in prison for up to 8 years is going to stop the next provider from selling a similar product. I have been involved in pre-employment drug testing programs for DOT and private employer purposes for over 20 years. I can testify that a pre-employment test can be foiled many ways and those that choose to continue to do drugs will not be fearful of losing their job in a random test if they pass the pre-employment. Drug abusers strongly believe it is their personal right to do drugs. People who have addiction problems do not change by serving time in jail. As a society, we must take more responsibility for our own families to solve our national drug abuse problems. Mandated programs through the court system does not solve the problem of the chronic abuser. This problem is much greater than the general public could even imagine.

  13. Mac Maclaren says:

    Even self-induced desperation breeds desperate actions. The Whizzinator is a replacement for the old method of self-catheterization. As one man told me, when I said: “That’s gotta hurt”! – “…didn’t hurt as bad as losing my job”. I wonder what the replacement for the Whizzinator will be? (Yeah, I know – ‘don’t use in the first place’ – but some folks don’t see that as a viable option.)

  14. Mac Maclaren says:

    Hang on, hang on! Here’s the part I really liked: “OSHA regulations prohibit use of microwaves to heat food once bodily fluids have been in them.”

    Now, let’s see…is this such a widespread problem in convenience stores (or elsewhere) that there’s an OSHA Reg about it? Really? I mean, what the heck are folks putting in there…and then doing WHAT with it? Oh, man, glad I’ve had chow already.

  15. Vince your analogy of the wizzinator and Meth is way off. They provided a legal substance and apparatius to cercumvent a positive test. This is not a crime. Using your train of thought we should arrest the inventor of the fuzz buster for the same purpose.

  16. Interesting…… now what about cleaners….. detox products… sold to help clean your urine or hair.

    We have observed collection rulings for a reason…..”the wizzinator” so do we now repeal the law now that the primary product has been ruled against?

    There are procedures for everything, proper conduct of a test, observed tests, recognition training, etc.

    It is a misdemeanor in TX to try to fraud a test. Let em try, if collectors are not trained properly or don’t do thier job then they are at fault.

    I beleive in free enterprise and don’t agree with the ruling. they have been after them for a long time. So is it now illegal to own one? I have used one in the past when training collectors on what to look for.

  17. Safety King says:


    OSHA regulations prohibit use of microwaves to heat food once bodily fluids have been in them. It was fake Urine so you can reuse the microwave! Stop making up excuses to beef up your equipment inventory. What’s all the commotion about LOL? Where does the chain of custody begin and end for this product? The inventor, the patent approvers, the retails chains who sold the product? They are all enablers. Even the people who bought it. Only in America….geez.

  18. New Safety Girl says:

    This is such a wierd article!!

    I really don’t think it matters if there is a product like this on the market or not. People will use whatever way they can to pass a urine test. I heard of someone using a clear platic tube attached to a balloon filled with clean urine. I guess you tape the clear tube to your leg and squeeze the balloon? I’m not really sure of the details. A friend of mine in college used to carry an eye dropper bottle full of bleach in his pocket just in case he was tested. Evidently, 2 or 3 drops of bleach are supposed to neutralize whatever is in the urine or confuse the lab equipment enough to say it is a negative test.

    There are so many things that are legal to own, but not legal to use (like the fuzz buster, as talked about in some other posts). Why should the makers of the product go to jail, just because there was a person that wanted to pass instead of fail? Shouldn’t it be the USER’S responsibility, not the maker’s, to know right from wrong? If this case were to set the standard, the makers of fuzz busters, bongs, cars, alcohol, and allergy medicine should all go to jail too, just in case their product was used irresponsibly. But where would it stop? Almost everything on the market today can be used as a poison, a weapon, an illegal drug, a means to make an illegal drug, etc., etc., etc.

    I guess I’m just one of those odd-balls that think people should be responsible for their own actions.

  19. An interesting discussion is worth comment. I do
    think that you ought to write more on this subject, it might
    not be a taboo matter but generally people don’t speak about these issues.
    To the next! Many thanks!!


  1. […] pre-employment drug tests may not be enoughMen guilty of selling device to foil drug testsInjured worker tested positive for drugs, still gets compInjured worker used pot, but was he high?5 […]

Speak Your Mind