Virginia Gun Owners Forum - VGOF

OK WEIRD request but I'll give you the speed version. I do a Ketogenic Diet (mainly fat, like Atkins) which long terms produces Ketones in your breath in the form of Acetone. This is an alcohol, from some horror stories I've heard most alcohol detecting equipment can't distinguish between them and just sees Alcohol. Did some goggling and it seemed true, then I found a link from a person doing this diet who bought a personal breathalyzer and blew a .05 stone cold sober!

https://www.ketogenicforums.com/t/test- ... lyzer/9450 - Pic included in the post

Here's the huge problem, Aside from the fact that I could possibly blow drunk while not drinking, or drink 1 beer and blow like I drank 10, I drive a truck for a living and as you guys know while in a CMV we're DUI at .04 so you can see the potential issue. Never been Breathalyzed in my life but it's still a scary thought. If you have a scientific side and would like to know as much as I would, I'm your guinea pig, this is killing me and I'd like to find out. I'm anybody would like to help out let me know.

Another thought... seems like something a grad student somewhere would be interested in...

Ironbear wrote:Another thought... seems like something a grad student somewhere would be interested in...

Probably, but they wouldn't have the Police quality breathalyzer on hand!

My understanding is that a blood test would rule out breathalyzer confusion. Otherwise, diabetics drivers would all be incarcerated.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

Also, it's worth noting that the portable breathalyzer isn't admissible in a court of law. It just gives probable cause to bring you in for the real breathalyzer (assuming you blow positive, anyway). I speak from experience, on this one.

Something else, that I learned from ASAP classes; one beer, one glass of wine, or one shot, will get you blowing a .08, unless you wait an hour, after that one drink to drive.

The blood test looks like something to request, should you ever be asked (read : demanded) to submit to a breathalyzer. Although, you may want to go do a blood test, beforehand, just to be sure of the results.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

snatale42 wrote:

Ironbear wrote:Another thought... seems like something a grad student somewhere would be interested in...

Probably, but they wouldn't have the Police quality breathalyzer on hand!

True. University labs would rely on instruments of much better quality...

SHMIV wrote:Also, it's worth noting that the portable breathalyzer isn't admissible in a court of law. It just gives probable cause to bring you in for the real breathalyzer (assuming you blow positive, anyway). I speak from experience, on this one.

I'm with ya, my big thing is mainly just wanting to see if my normal state looks like I'm drunk to those things, especially since when I'm at work I'm DUI at .04

What's wrong of catching a cop at the local donut shop and asking him to test you?

That's the REAL problem with MADD... I was hit head on by a drunk driver in high school, and VERY active in that group... until they starting lowering the limit into "natural alcohol levels" of people with medical conditions.

They tried to get it to .025, but the AMA said "Uh... diabetics run around at that level naturally, so do people on certain diets."

How about just going after people who are swerving, and running over the lines, and acting erratic? Oh wait! They were JUST ON THE DAMNABLE CELL PHONE!

The NTSB has already said usage of cell phone rates the same as driving at .10, to .15.

But that narrative wouldn't be enforceable. OH WAIT! Yeah it would... but it's not something the public wants to accept.

Reverenddel wrote:That's the REAL problem with MADD... I was hit head on by a drunk driver in high school, and VERY active in that group... until they starting lowering the limit into "natural alcohol levels" of people with medical conditions.

They tried to get it to .025, but the AMA said "Uh... diabetics run around at that level naturally, so do people on certain diets."

How about just going after people who are swerving, and running over the lines, and acting erratic? Oh wait! They were JUST ON THE DAMNABLE CELL PHONE!

The NTSB has already said usage of cell phone rates the same as driving at .10, to .15.

But that narrative wouldn't be enforceable. OH WAIT! Yeah it would... but it's not something the public wants to accept.

You right.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

I've heard for years that cell phones cause more accidents that drunk drivers.
I've never verified that, but it sounds reasonable.