Studies have shown that the use of oral contraceptive steroids eliminate alcohol more efficiently than women who aren't using them. They reach their peak BAC's faster and return to lower levels more rapidly. This is a problem when the breath test used to estimate the BAC at the time of driving is not administered until 1-2 hours later. Also, pregnant women or ones using birth control pills had higher levels of acetylaldehyde on their breath because of a decreased ability to metabolize the enzyme as as their level of sex steroids increases. (Birth control pills work by increasing the level of sex steroid hormones to simulate pregnancy).
Since the breathalyzer machines measure the amount of acetylaldehyde in the breath and use it to calculate the BAC, this presents a problem. The machines actually measure those chemical compounds with a methyl group in their molecular structure. Both ethyl alcohol and acetylaldehyde have that same group. See O.C.S." Papple, "The Effects of Oral Contraceptive Steroids on the Rate of Post-Absorptive Phase Decline of Blood Alcohol Concentration in the Adult Woman, 15(1) Canadian Society of Forensic Science Journal 17 (1982), Jeavons and Zeiner, "Effects of Elevated Female Sex Steroids on Ethanol and Acetaldehyde Metabolism in Humans", 8(4) Alcoholism: Clinical and Experimental Research 352 (1984).
Friday, June 5, 2009
Breathalyzers Discriminate Against Women -Part 3
Breathalyzer machines work by measuring the amount of alcohol in a breath sample. They then multiply that amount by 2100 and report that as the blood alcohol volume. This number is called the partition ratio. It assumes that for every gram of alcohol in a breath sample, there are 2100 grams in that person's blood.
Here's the problem. Studies have shown that the actual ratio of breath alcohol to blood alcohol varies from person to person. It varies from around a low of around 1100:1 up to a high of 3500:1. State v. McCarty 434 N.W.2d 67 (S.D. 1988). This means that the lower a person's actual partition ratio, the higher their blood alcohol reading.
Lets take three people, each with .06% true BAC. One with a partition ratio of 2100:1 will have a breath test of .06%. Another person with a low ratio of 1100:1 will report a result 53.26% lower than their true result. Finally one with a high ratio of 3500:1 will report a result 126% higher than the true result. According to a study, women have higher partition ratios than men and will have higher breath test results. Jones, "Determination of Liquid/Air Partition Coefficients for Dilute Solutions of Ethanol in Water, Whole Blood and Plasma", Analytical Toxicology 193 (July/August 1983)
Here's the problem. Studies have shown that the actual ratio of breath alcohol to blood alcohol varies from person to person. It varies from around a low of around 1100:1 up to a high of 3500:1. State v. McCarty 434 N.W.2d 67 (S.D. 1988). This means that the lower a person's actual partition ratio, the higher their blood alcohol reading.
Lets take three people, each with .06% true BAC. One with a partition ratio of 2100:1 will have a breath test of .06%. Another person with a low ratio of 1100:1 will report a result 53.26% lower than their true result. Finally one with a high ratio of 3500:1 will report a result 126% higher than the true result. According to a study, women have higher partition ratios than men and will have higher breath test results. Jones, "Determination of Liquid/Air Partition Coefficients for Dilute Solutions of Ethanol in Water, Whole Blood and Plasma", Analytical Toxicology 193 (July/August 1983)
Breathalyzers Discriminate Against Women - Part 2
We have all heard and probably noticed that women tend to become more intoxicated than men when they drink the same amount of alcohol. Many driver's education classes, alcohol education and therapy classes and other department of motor vehicles claim that it is because of their generally smaller size and lower body weights than men. There is a lot more to it than simply size and weight. Because not every driver is a 150 pound man, the law should consider gender differences when determining safe levels of drinking. Here's why:
Italian researchers found that the stomach lining contains an enzyme called gastric alcohol dehydrogenase that breaks down alcohol. Women have less of that enzyme than men. To determine the relative effects of the enzyme, they gave alcohol both orally and intravenously to groups of alcoholic and non-alcoholic men and women. They found that women reached the same levels of blood alcohol as men after drinking only half as much.
When they factored in the test's subjects' weight they found that women reached BAC levels illegal in a DUI case after drinking 20 to 30 percent less alcohol than men. See. Frezza and Lieber, "High Blood Alcohol Levels in Women: The Role of Decreased Gastric Alcohol Dehydrogenase Activity and First-Pass Metabolism", 322(2) New England Journal of Medicine 95 (1990).
Italian researchers found that the stomach lining contains an enzyme called gastric alcohol dehydrogenase that breaks down alcohol. Women have less of that enzyme than men. To determine the relative effects of the enzyme, they gave alcohol both orally and intravenously to groups of alcoholic and non-alcoholic men and women. They found that women reached the same levels of blood alcohol as men after drinking only half as much.
When they factored in the test's subjects' weight they found that women reached BAC levels illegal in a DUI case after drinking 20 to 30 percent less alcohol than men. See. Frezza and Lieber, "High Blood Alcohol Levels in Women: The Role of Decreased Gastric Alcohol Dehydrogenase Activity and First-Pass Metabolism", 322(2) New England Journal of Medicine 95 (1990).
Breathalyzers Discriminate Against Women -- Part 1
If you have a BAC above .08 in Colorado, you are guilty of drunk driving. Your age, race, and gender do not matter. Perhaps they should. Several scientific studies have indicated that Breathalyzer machines discriminate against women.
In Colorado, if you refuse to take a breath test, you automatically lose your driving privelige. Also, the fact that you refused the test can be used as evidence of your guilt. Trying and failing to blow enough air into the machine is also treated as a refusal. Women have a higher rate of "refusals" reported by the machines than do men.
Breathalyzer machines do not directly measure the amount of air blown by a suspect. They measure the pressure of the suspects breath using a pressure sensor and the amount of time that the pressure is present. As air flows faster, its pressure increases. Mathematically, volume is the quotient of air flow and time. The machine makes assumptions about how hard the suspect is blowing and calculate the volume based on those assumptions. When those assumptions are incorrect, so are the results.
In a study of Breathalyzer test results in Florida, on average, women produced samples that were 20% to 40% lower than men. Women with lower lung capacities are not able to produce the minimum volume of air that the machine needs to complete its analysis. When it doesn't get enough air, the machine reports a refusal. In that same Florida study, women in every age group are twice as likely to be penalized for failing to produce a sufficient breath sample as men.
An equally troubling problem occurs when the machine reports an result, which has been inaccurately calculated. Because the machines computer software does not consider the subject's age, gender or the presence of medical conditions. The machines are inherently inaccurate.
Studies have shown that a 1 degree Centigrade change in body temperature can produce a 7.5% change in the reported BAC. Suspects with higher body temperatures have higher readings while those with lower body temperatures have lower readings.
In Colorado, if you refuse to take a breath test, you automatically lose your driving privelige. Also, the fact that you refused the test can be used as evidence of your guilt. Trying and failing to blow enough air into the machine is also treated as a refusal. Women have a higher rate of "refusals" reported by the machines than do men.
Breathalyzer machines do not directly measure the amount of air blown by a suspect. They measure the pressure of the suspects breath using a pressure sensor and the amount of time that the pressure is present. As air flows faster, its pressure increases. Mathematically, volume is the quotient of air flow and time. The machine makes assumptions about how hard the suspect is blowing and calculate the volume based on those assumptions. When those assumptions are incorrect, so are the results.
In a study of Breathalyzer test results in Florida, on average, women produced samples that were 20% to 40% lower than men. Women with lower lung capacities are not able to produce the minimum volume of air that the machine needs to complete its analysis. When it doesn't get enough air, the machine reports a refusal. In that same Florida study, women in every age group are twice as likely to be penalized for failing to produce a sufficient breath sample as men.
An equally troubling problem occurs when the machine reports an result, which has been inaccurately calculated. Because the machines computer software does not consider the subject's age, gender or the presence of medical conditions. The machines are inherently inaccurate.
Studies have shown that a 1 degree Centigrade change in body temperature can produce a 7.5% change in the reported BAC. Suspects with higher body temperatures have higher readings while those with lower body temperatures have lower readings.
Wednesday, May 20, 2009
Friday, May 15, 2009
Field Sobriety Tests For DUI Don't Work!
Law enforcement officers use field sobriety tests (FST's) to determine whether a driver is under the influence of alcohol. In Colorado they typically use three tests, the nystagmus "(follow the flashlight with my eyes"), the walk and turn, and one leg stand test. Although the tests appear to be "scientific", they have no basis in science and are useless in determining whether or not a suspect is under the influence of alcohol.
The tests all depend on the officer's judgment of the suspect's performance. Since the officer's has pretty much decided that the suspect was impaired before asking them to take the test; they will see what they expect to see.
The tests are also administered under conditions that almost guarantee failure: on an sloped surface, late at night on the shoulder of the road, only feet from oncoming traffic, with the police car lights and strobe lights providing the only illumination, and given to a nervous person who is not familiar with the tests. That person also may have difficulty hearing the officer, understanding English, or have health problems that make the tests difficult if not impossible to perform. Finally, the suspects clothing can hinder their ability to perform the tests.
For example, one of my clients was required to perform the tests on a snowy evening while wearing an evening gown and 3 inch stiletto heels. The tests were given on the inside shoulder of Interstate 25 with cars and trucks passing by at 60 miles per hour. Nobody could have passed a test under these conditions.
The three most common tests were developed by the for profit Southern California Research Institute. They were paid for with a government grant from the Department of Transportation. According to their own research, 47 percent of the subjects tested would have been arrested for DUI - even though they were under the .10% limit. (Burns and Moskowitz, Psychophysical Tests for DWI Arrest: Final Report, DOT-HS-802-424, NHTSA, 1977.)
Independent testing shows that the roadside sobriety tests are not reliable. In 1991, Clemson University researchers conducted a study on the accuracy of the tests. They videotaped sober suspects taking the tests, showed the tapes to police officers and asked them to interpret the results. The results were astounding. According to the officers 46% of the sober suspects were too drunk to drive.(Cole and Nowaczyk, "Field Sobriety Tests: Are they Designed for Failure?" 79 Perceptual and Motor Skills Journal 99 (1994).
This presents a double-edged problem.First, the police, judges, prosecutors and jurors shouldn't rely on these tests to make a decision about whether or not to prosecute or convict a defendant. Also, the fact that you can stand on one leg or walk a straight line after drinking doesn't mean that you can safely drive home. Aside from not drinking, the only way to ensure that you won't drive under the influence is to use a cab or have a designated driver.
Peter M. Johnson JD
4610 S. Ulster Street #150
Denver, CO 80237
(303) 770-4417
http://www.johnsonlawfirm.com
Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Peter_M._Johnson
The tests all depend on the officer's judgment of the suspect's performance. Since the officer's has pretty much decided that the suspect was impaired before asking them to take the test; they will see what they expect to see.
The tests are also administered under conditions that almost guarantee failure: on an sloped surface, late at night on the shoulder of the road, only feet from oncoming traffic, with the police car lights and strobe lights providing the only illumination, and given to a nervous person who is not familiar with the tests. That person also may have difficulty hearing the officer, understanding English, or have health problems that make the tests difficult if not impossible to perform. Finally, the suspects clothing can hinder their ability to perform the tests.
For example, one of my clients was required to perform the tests on a snowy evening while wearing an evening gown and 3 inch stiletto heels. The tests were given on the inside shoulder of Interstate 25 with cars and trucks passing by at 60 miles per hour. Nobody could have passed a test under these conditions.
The three most common tests were developed by the for profit Southern California Research Institute. They were paid for with a government grant from the Department of Transportation. According to their own research, 47 percent of the subjects tested would have been arrested for DUI - even though they were under the .10% limit. (Burns and Moskowitz, Psychophysical Tests for DWI Arrest: Final Report, DOT-HS-802-424, NHTSA, 1977.)
Independent testing shows that the roadside sobriety tests are not reliable. In 1991, Clemson University researchers conducted a study on the accuracy of the tests. They videotaped sober suspects taking the tests, showed the tapes to police officers and asked them to interpret the results. The results were astounding. According to the officers 46% of the sober suspects were too drunk to drive.(Cole and Nowaczyk, "Field Sobriety Tests: Are they Designed for Failure?" 79 Perceptual and Motor Skills Journal 99 (1994).
This presents a double-edged problem.First, the police, judges, prosecutors and jurors shouldn't rely on these tests to make a decision about whether or not to prosecute or convict a defendant. Also, the fact that you can stand on one leg or walk a straight line after drinking doesn't mean that you can safely drive home. Aside from not drinking, the only way to ensure that you won't drive under the influence is to use a cab or have a designated driver.
Peter M. Johnson JD
4610 S. Ulster Street #150
Denver, CO 80237
(303) 770-4417
http://www.johnsonlawfirm.com
Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Peter_M._Johnson
Monday, May 4, 2009
DUI Crackdown: Report Drunk Drivers, Call 911 - OTS Reference - The Office of Traffic Safety, California Highway Patrol, and local law enforcement want everyone to drive safely and responsibly.
Sleep-Driving – A Recently Reported Sleep Disorder - Have you ever woken up and found yourself behind the steering wheel of your car and driving? Patrick Kennedy, yes, THE son of Ted Kennedy has! He drove to the US Capitol believing he had to vote, crashing his car into a security barrier ...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
