Preview of Member Only Content
For full access: or Become a Member
Flawed Conclusions Based on the Blood/Breath Ratio: A Critical Commentary
By Dominick A. Labianca Ph.D.
Any test conducted by a breath-alcohol analyzer on a human subject involves the analysis of a sample of breath in contact with the subject’s circulating pulmonary blood. The fundamental premise of such an analysis is that it is supposed to produce a result that reflects the corresponding blood-alcohol concentration (BAC) of the individual providing the sample, assuming that the test is conducted in a jurisdiction where results are reported in terms of BAC.
Thus, breath-alcohol analysis is an indirect measure of a subject’s BAC, and this type of testing, therefore, necessarily requires that the measured breath-alcohol concentration (BrAC) be transformed into an associated BAC. Such a transformation entails the use of a conversion factor that is uniformly applied to all test subjects in a given jurisdiction. Problems stemming from the uniform application of that factor are addressed in this article.
The variability of the ratio of BAC to BrAC — a ratio hereinafter termed “BBR
Want to read more?
The Champion archive is reserved for NACDL members.
NACDL members, please login to read the rest of this article.
Not a member? Join now.
Or click here to see an overview of NACDL Member benefits.
See what NACDL members say about us.
To read the current issue of The Champion in its entirety, click here.
- Media inquiries: Contact NACDL's Director of Public Affairs & Communications Ivan J. Dominguez at 202-465-7662 or email@example.com
- Academic Requests: Full articles of The Champion Magazine are available for academic and research purposes in the WestLaw and LexisNexis databases.