SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
A company that makes consumer-grade "breathalyzers" has settled with the U.S. Federal Trade Commission due to the inherent inaccuracy of the devices:
If you're trusting a personal breathalyzer to protect you from a drunk driving conviction, think again, since the devices might not work as advertised. In the past few years, various companies have begun marketing personal breathalyzers that fit in your pocket and can report blood alcohol content (BAC) levels to a smartphone. El Reg's Vulture West hacks in San Francisco carried out a group test on such devices, which provided much merriment.
Breathometer, which was one of the devices we tested, has just agreed to settle charges brought by the FTC – America's trade watchdog – that claims the company made about its breathalyzers weren't backed up by scientific evidence and that users could be dangerously misled about how sober they were.
"People relied on the defendant's products to decide whether it was safe to get behind the wheel," said Jessica Rich, director of the FTC's Bureau of Consumer Protection. "Overstating the accuracy of the devices was deceptive – and dangerous." According to the FTC, Breathometer sold more than $5m worth of its alcohol testing devices and claimed that they were "law-enforcement grade products" that were subject to "government lab-grade testing." This wasn't the case, the FTC claims, and alleges that the company was aware that its devices routinely reported lower BAC levels than were accurate, but continued to sell them.
(Score: 2) by jelizondo on Saturday January 28 2017, @05:32PM
I always say that tolerance is so low that nowadays a Catholic priest shouldn’t drive after officiating mass… That little wine is enough to get you in trouble with the cops.
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Saturday January 28 2017, @05:55PM
I know a truck driver who was convicted of DWI because he had a cold, and took an over-the-counter cough suppressant, according to directions on the label. Tolerances are to low in general, but they are even lower for professional drivers.
Even before the laws got crazy, I knew my limits. Driving a car was fine, with three beers under my belt. Motorcycle, two beers. An eighteen wheeler was good with two beers. IN FACT, at that point in time, the law clearly stated that a truck driver was permitted to consume two drinks with his meal. Breweries back then actually provided their goods, free of charge, in the driver's break rooms. You could drink a couple beers while waiting for your truck to be loaded.
The laws were crazy lax when I was a kid, and they've swung to crazy strict today. Maybe one day, we'll find the sensible medium.
Until then, anyone who gets behind the wheel after two or more drinks is a damned fool looking for an opportunity to enrich his county's coffers.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday January 29 2017, @04:25AM
Americans (many, at least) have to have some group they are allowed to demonize. Even more so specifically, politicians and pressure groups make entire careers beating up on the out-of-favor group of the moment. It's an EASY job to keep: just continue getting "tougher" every single year on the same group and build up a reputation for yourself. It's zero risk! And what a cash cow it has become: alcohol treatment and counselling, car confiscation, lawyers to defend you, and now the ignition interlock industry is getting in on this "growth" industry! This may be what a late-stage service economy looks like: a bunch of bullshit jobs that exist because we have legislated them.