Yet another DUI...ish question.

EdFred

New member
But hey, I'm not unregistered, so there's no hiding here.

I just got issued my Michigan Concealed Pistol License (yes it is a license not a certificate) and I may not carry concealed while under the influence with penalties as follows.

BAC of .02 - .07 = State civil infraction, $100 fine, and up to 1-year CPL license revocation.
BAC of .08 - .09 = 93-day misdemeanor, $100 fine, and up to 3-year CPL license revocation.
BAC of .10 or more = 93-day misdemeanor, $100 fine, and permanent CPL license revocation.

So, let's say for whatever reason I blow a .03 while I'm carrying and driving (yes, Listerine will show up at that level if recently used). Is this necessary to report to the FAA?
 
alaskaflyer said:
What studies?
Wikipedia entry on breathalyers mentions a couple such studies:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Breathalyzer
"On the other hand, products such as mouthwash or breath spray can "fool" breath machines by significantly raising test results. Listerine mouthwash, for example, contains 27% alcohol. The breath machine is calibrated with the assumption that the alcohol is coming from alcohol in the blood diffusing into the lung rather than directly from the mouth, so it applies a partition ratio of 2100:1 in computing blood alcohol concentration—resulting in a false high test reading. To counter this, officers are not supposed to administer a PBT for 15 minutes after the subject eats, vomits, or puts anything in their mouth. In addition, most instruments require that the individual be tested twice at least two minutes apart. Mouthwash or other mouth alcohol will have somewhat dissipated after two minutes and cause the second reading to disagree with the first, requiring a retest. (Also see the discussion of the "slope parameter" of the Intoxilyzer 5000 in the "Mouth Alcohol" section above.) This was clearly illustrated in a study conducted with Listerine mouthwash on a breath machine and reported in an article entitled "Field Sobriety Testing: Intoxilyzers and Listerine Antiseptic" published in the July 1985 issue of The Police Chief (p. 70). Seven individuals were tested at a police station, with readings of 0.00%. Each then rinsed his mouth with 20 milliliters of Listerine mouthwash for 30 seconds in accordance with directions on the label. All seven were then tested on the machine at intervals of one, three, five and ten minutes. The results indicated an average reading of 0.43 blood-alcohol concentration, indicating a level that, if accurate, approaches lethal proportions. After three minutes, the average level was still 0.020, despite the absence of any alcohol in the system. Even after five minutes, the average level was 0.011.
In another study, reported in 8(22) Drinking/Driving Law Letter 1, a scientist tested the effects of Binaca breath spray on an Intoxilyzer 5000. He performed 23 tests with subjects who sprayed their throats and obtained readings as high as 0.81—far beyond lethal levels. The scientist also noted that the effects of the spray did not fall below detectable levels until after 18 minutes."
 
alaskaflyer said:
To answer both your post and Ed's question - those studies seems to be somewhat old to me:
If the way breathalyzers has changed, then the age of the studies would be relevant. Assuming the Wikipedia entries are legit (I'm not interested enough to go see if they are real) then the onus on finding contrary studies now falls on anyone who disputes the studies cited in that article.

But it seems reasonable to me to believe that, yes, alcohol in the mouth but not in the blood stream would generate high false positives in such tests.

As a side note, but at least related to alcohol consumption, I remember an episode of Alton Brown's "Good Eats" in which he showed that the alcohol in wine or beer added to a cooking dish does not all burn off - in fact quite a bit can remain in the food. This blog entry summarizes:

http://www.bbqaddicts.com/blog/recipes/recipes-with-alcohol/
 
Back
Top