The A-Files, Alcohol A-Z for Alcohol Awareness Month: Judgment and Reaction Time

(see online article)

Alcohol compromises judgment. Any given night in any tavern will prove that point spectacularly. When it comes to chronic use and the disease of alcoholism, the judgment problem manifests itself as a complete level of denial of any problem. It's the only disease that convinces the patient he or she isn't sick. A person with cancer or the flu feels and knows he's sick. A person with alcoholism doesn't feel sick until he tries to quit.

When I do community presentations, I haul a couple of participants up to the stage to demonstrate that the mind works best on the equation, Intellect over Emotion, but alcohol inverts the equation to Emotion over Intellect. That's what causes ordinarily smart people to do extraordinarily dumb stuff. Like getting behind the wheel. Judgment is impaired first, but reaction time suffers with the very first drink, too. It doesn't matter how big or experienced the drinker is, impaired reaction time is a function of alcohol being a central nervous system depressant drug. Motor skills begin to diminish at .02 Blood Alcohol Concentration (BAC). The legal limit for driving is .08 BAC in the U.S.

The Oxford Journal demonstrated in a lab with a stopwatch what most drinkers deny with a vengeance. Inspection Time – the time interval between seeing something and accurately processing it – was measurably slower at even .05 intoxication. The drug narrows the field of vision, cuts color visibility, increases problems with glare and and difficulty moving from light to dark. Then reaction time – responding to what was seen – told the rest of the story of how poorly the central nervous system performs on the drug alcohol.

Reaction time is 1/5 of a second for an unimpaired driver. With alcohol in the system, reaction time is slowed to 4/5 of a second at .05 BAC. At 60 mph, a second means 88 feet. A fifth of a second is 17.5 feet, 4/5 of a second is 70.4 feet. The SUV slamming on the brakes in front of an impaired driver is 53 feet closer, reaction-time wise, compared to an unimpaired driver. It's math and science and has nothing to do with driving or drinking experience.
The entire 26 episode HD series is available on disc, along with fact sheets, for helping professions. See the preorder special at tr.im/AFiles

Visit alcohologist.com for a replay of CBS Sports' Power Up Your Health featuring Scott Stevens.  Another interview is on Alcohol Awareness.  Syndicated radio program Savvy Central Radio did this interview, too. Lucy Pireel's "All That's Written" included a feature called "When alcohol doesn't work for you anymore."  Details on the third literary award for Every Silver Lining Has a Cloud and the first for Adding Fire to the Fuel also can be found on www.alcohologist.com. Download the FREE Alcohology app in the Google PlayStore today. Stevens also is the public relations officer with AddictedMinds.com 

UM study: Alcohol detectors in all cars would cut impaired driving crash deaths 85 percent

Researchers at the University of Michigan Injury Center and the school's Transportation Research Institute studied the impact of installing alcohol ignition interlock devices in all newly purchased vehicles over a 15-year period. According to the March 19 UM news release, 85 percent of crash deaths attributable to alcohol-involved motor vehicle crashes would be eliminated by the device.

The study authors conclude, “That would mean preventing more than 59,000 deaths. Another 1.25 million nonfatal injuries would also be prevented, as the nation would see a reduction of 84-89 percent. When it comes to dollars, all these lives saved and injuries prevented would save society $343 billion over 15 years. In fact, the cost of installing the devices would be recouped after just three years.”

This is the first study that models the impact of a universal policy installing alcohol interlocks on all new vehicles sold in the U.S. It was based on data from the Fatality Analysis Reporting System and the National Automotive Sampling System's General Estimates System.

Though the injury prevention benefit was apparent for all ages, drivers who are closest to the legal drinking age would likely be the most significant beneficiaries of alcohol interlocks. Among drivers ages 21 to 29 years, about 481,000 deaths and injuries would be prevented, nearly 35 percent of total deaths and injuries for all age groups. Drivers under 21 who engaged in drinking while driving would also benefit substantially, with nearly 195,000 deaths and impaired driving ("drunk driving") injuries potentially prevented.

"It is often difficult to penetrate these age groups with effective public health interventions and policies to prevent drinking and driving," said lead author Patrick Carter, assistant professor at the medical school. "By capitalizing on recent technological advancements that make alcohol-detecting sensors seamless to the driver and applying such technology more broadly to all newly built vehicles, we can actually have a substantial injury prevention impact among traditionally hard-to-reach high-risk populations."

The research was supported by the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (NIAAA), Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the univeristy's Injury Center.

In 2012, the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) recommended a passive alcohol detector for all cars (see related story). "Technology is the game-changer in reducing alcohol-related crashes on our nation's roadways," said Deborah A.P. Hersman, NTSB chairman, in a statement posted on the NTSB web site. "Achieving zero alcohol-impaired driving-related deaths is possible only if society is willing to separate the impaired driver from the driving task."

Critics worry that such systems have not yet been perfected and that they may not distinguish the driver's breath from that of a passenger, among other concerns.

The book, What the Early Worm Gets first made a call for this passive type of detection in 2010. “Some Americans will balk at this as an intrusion. If we, as a country, say preventing intoxicated driving deaths is a priority, mandating this safety equipment the way seatbelts and airbags are required is a no brainer. If we say 'hands off MY booze just test the bad guys,' drinking and driving deaths are no priority... 3/4 of impaired drivers who cause death or injury have no prior convictions.

“This is a put-up-or-shut-up moment for communities that claim keeping the streets free of impaired drivers is a prime concern. The only reason the detectors won't entirely eradicate mixing gasoline and alcohol is that the legal limit to which they'll be set is .08 BAC while motor skills, reaction time and judgment begin to be impaired at .02.”

(See entire article)

Visit alcohologist.com for a replay of CBS Sports' Power Up Your Health featuring Scott Stevens.  Host Ed Forteau led a discussion on the health risks and myths of health benefits of drinking.  Lucy Pireel's "All That's Written" included a feature on Every Silver Lining Has a Cloud called "When alcohol doesn't work for you anymore."  Details on the third literary award for Every Silver Lining Has a Cloud also can be found on www.alcohologist.com, plus an interview with Christoph Fisher Books.  Mr. Fisher is an acclaimed international author from the UK, among his works is the Alzheimer's book "Time to Let Go."  Download the FREE Alcohology app in the Google PlayStore today.

Impaired Driving Awareness Month: 53 feet to safety

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) is a sponsor of the National Impaired Driving Awareness Month campaign, along with Mothers Against Drunk Drivers (MADD) and the Governors’ Highway Safety Association. New Year's Day is the deadliest on the roads: The second-deadliest is Thanksgiving Day. In between, the daily average is 45 impaired driving related deaths. The rest of the year daily average? Twenty eight per day.

In the United States the NHTSA tallied 10,322 people killed in alcohol-related collisions, representing a third of 2012 traffic deaths. One out of every 10 arrests for all crimes in the U.S. were for Driving Under the Influence (DUI) or Operating While Impaired (OWI), accounting for 1 out of every 80 licensed drivers. The death toll is higher than the previous year, despite tougher penalties, safer cars and more enforcement.
Four more facts:

• In 2012, 29.1 million people admitted to driving under the influence of alcohol - that’s more than the population of Texas – according to the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA).
• Intoxicated driving involvement in fatal crashes was 4.5 times higher at night than during the day (36 versus 8 percent) – according to the NHTSA.
• Nine of 10 drinking and driving incidents happen after drinking with family, friends or co-workers – common during the holidays. “There is almost always somebody around who could be part of the solution,” says DrinkingAndDriving.org.
• Highway alcohol-related deaths are 100 percent preventable. Passive alcohol detectors can measure a driver's BAC before starting the vehicle and render it unable to start. If the driver is intoxicated, he isn't driving. Critics claim the technology has not been perfected. However, the technology already exists for the non-invasive technique (see related examiner article), although the public appetite for the device does not. The idea was suggested four years ago in the book What the Early Worm Gets as the way to conclusively eliminate all drinking and driving accidents.

“Our goal is to get to zero deaths because each alcohol-impaired death is preventable,” National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) Chairman Deborah Hersman said. “They can and should be prevented. The tools exist. What is needed is the will.”

Drunk or buzzed driving is the act of operating or driving a motor vehicle while motor skills are impaired under the influence of alcohol or drugs. In the United States, the point of impairment is pegged at .08 Blood Alcohol Concentration (BAC). However, studies have demonstrated that motor-skill impairment begins at much lower BACs. Reaction time is 1/5 of a second for an unimpaired driver. With alcohol in the system, reaction time is slowed to 4/5 of a second at .06 BAC. At 60 mph, a second means 88 feet. A fifth of a second is 17.5 feet, 4/5 of a second is 70.4 feet. The family minivan slamming on the brakes in front of an impaired driver is 53 feet closer, reaction-time wise, compared to an unimpaired driver.

Lab research indicates at 0.02 to 0.05 BAC, the ability to see or locate moving lights correctly is reduced as is reaction time and the ability to judge distance. A 2014 study demonstrated crash risk increases 42 percent after just a single drink. (See Crash risk jumps at 0.01 BAC) Even if not obviously impaired, at 0.05 BAC drivers are twice as likely to have a crash as before they started drinking...At 0.08 BAC drivers are five times more likely to have a crash than before they started drinking. Over .08, the crash likelihood jumps to 10 times that of a sober driver.

Enveloped in the push to legalize marijuana today is the illusion that driving “high” is somehow safer. It's still illegal to drive under the influence of any drug, not just alcohol, even in states where marijuana isn't illegal to possess or consume. Smoking or ingesting weed impairs judgment and motor coordination and slows reaction time, and a stoned person has an increased chance of being involved in and being responsible for an accident. Research from the NHTSA indicates that when drivers are killed in motor vehicle crashes, drugs other than alcohol are involved about 18 percent of the time. That means that one in six drivers killed in traffic mishaps are under the influence of drugs other than alcohol.

Another 2010 study published in the journal Drug and Alcohol Dependence found that of all drivers involved in auto crashes, 6.8 percent tested positive for THC, the active ingredient in marijuana. The same survey found that 21 percent of those drivers also were above the legal BAC level.

--See full article

www.alcohologist.com

Visit alcohologist.com for a replay of the Bringing Inspiration To Earth show feature with Scott Stevens. Lucy Pireel's "All That's Written" included a feature on Every Silver Lining Has a Cloud called "When alcohol doesn't work for you anymore."  Details on the third literary award for Every Silver Lining Has a Cloud also can be found on www.alcohologist.com, plus an interview with Scott Stevens on Health Media Now and one at Christoph Fisher Books.  Mr. Fisher is an acclaimed international author from the UK, among his works is the Alzheimer's book "Time to Let Go."  

Treasury finds liquor labels understate alcohol content

Nearly 30 percent of alcoholic beverages were found to have inaccurate labels, putting consumers at risk, according to a March 10 survey compiled by the Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau (TTB), a division of the U.S. Department of the Treasury. While most beverage alcohol containers complied with U.S. label regulations, on many the booze contained more alcohol than stated and above regulatory tolerances.

The TTB’s Alcohol Beverage Sampling Program (ABSP) is conducted at random every year using products available in the U.S. The 2013 survey sampled 275 distilled spirits, 239 malt beverages and 154 wines. A total of 190 products across all type were non-compliant, 80 of which were distilled spirits. The TTB found 15 instances of spirits containing less alcohol than claimed on the label.
According to bartending trade publication, The Spirits Business, “Not only do such products avoid paying higher rates of excise tax, they pose a threat to consumers who are unaware of how much alcohol they are drinking.” The TTB noted, “The results of our sampling program over the past few years indicate that proofing and gauging of distilled spirits is a problem area for some industry members.”

TTB states it will raise awareness of the issue and develop educational tools to assist distillers “with their gauging skills” using standardized scientific methods.

The mislabeling puts consumers at risk in misleading the drinker about the consequences, health and legal. When a publication suggests that a glass of wine a day may be “safe” (See related article When it comes to cancer, no amount is safe) a glass of wine at 12 percent alcohol is not the same as one at 20 percent. For a person with risk factors for the disease of alcoholism, abstinence is the only sure prevention and maintenance of the disease, but for social drinkers, they may unknowingly be drinking a hazardous amount and a lot more than they intended. Also, when motorists order a mixed drink they think is 80 proof (40 percent) and it is really 100 proof, it could mislead them to believe they would be below the legal threshold for driving, 0.08 blood alcohol concentration (BAC). Scientific studies warn, however, that impaired driving begins at a much lower BAC level.
--from examiner.com, see full article
www.alcohologist.com

Scroll down for the replay of the Dr. Jeanette Gallagher show feature with Scott Stevens. Lucy Pireel's "All That's Written" included a feature on Every Silver Lining Has a Cloud called "When alcohol doesn't work for you anymore."  Details on the third literary award for Every Silver Lining Has a Cloud can be found on www.alcohologist.com, plus the interview with Scott Stevens at Christoph Fisher Books.  Mr. Fisher is an acclaimed international historical fiction novelist from the UK.  
 

SAVE THE DATE:  Scott Stevens will be part of the opening night symposium for the REEL Recovery Film Festival San Francisco.

Texan gets probation for murdering four while driving intoxicated: You can't make ice cream out of cow shi

A Tarrant County, Texas, judge was RIGHT in saying a teen who murdered four while driving intoxicated wouldn't get treatment while incarcerated. But the judge was gravely mistaken for punishing the murderer with probation. In Wisconsin, where I grew up, we have a saying: You can't make ice cream out of cow shi... And here's why nobody is making ice cream this week.


First, the case. CBS Dallas-Fort Worth reported a judge sentenced the 16-year-old teenager to 10 years probation for an intoxicated driving crash that killed four people in June. Hollie and Shelby Boyles had left their home to help Breanna Mitchell, whose SUV broke down. Brian Jennings, a youth pastor, was driving past the mother and daughter and pulled over to help. That’s when investigators say the Ethan Couch slammed into everyone. Couch admitted he was drinking and driving. At the time of the crash his blood alcohol was three times the legal limit.

Eric Boyles, a North Texas man who had two family members killed in the crash, walked from the court and tried to speak through the tears. “We had over 180 years of life taken, future life, not 180 years lived, but 180 years of future life taken and two of those were my wife and daughter.”

Defense attorney Scott Brown said, “There is nothing the judge could have done to lessen the suffering for any of those families.” Lawyers had argued that the boy’s parents should share the blame for the crash, because they gave him everything he wanted. The teenager’s attorneys pleaded for a sentence that involved therapy in California, at cost $450,000 a year, rather than years behind bars.

“She [judge Jean Boyd] fashioned a sentence that is going to keep him under the thumb of the justice system for the next 10 years,” Brown said. “And if he doesn’t do what he’s supposed to do, if he has one misstep at all then this judge or an adult judge when he’s transferred can then incarcerate him.”

Eric Boyles didn’t agree with the judge’s sentence or the assertion that therapy is what the young perpetrator needed. The victims families were hoping for closure. “Today could have been a good start at that, unfortunately the wounds that it opened only makes the healing process that much greater and more difficult,” Boyles said.

________

During sentencing, Judge Boyd noted that Jennings would not get the treatment he needed while incarcerated. And that is an unfortunate and expensive truth about the corrections system. I've written a book on it, reported on it, and I have been on the inside as an offender. People can and do get better in corrections' drinking programs, but it is rare. It is not treatment on the inside, it is mistreatment.

No broadly conceived treatment program for offenders exists today. The 12-step-oriented programs are kept at arms' length because of their spiritual leaning, even though their success rate is arguably better than all else.

(Some of the observations that follow come from What the Early Worm Gets, my 2010 book on coerced programs.) Sensory deprivation is the ONLY way for an educated person to avoid the rampant anti-sobriety messages in jail. Forty to fifty percent of the time in jail is spent scheming to get drugs or alcohol into jail, planning to deal or drink or get high on the outside on release day, or glorifying how they used drugs and alcohol (and people). It is a swap meet for bad ideas. This lively chit chat takes place between sleeping and watching cartoons or gambling. One face is worn during the program, and another anti-sobriety face is worn through the rest of the time in the facility.

The library was a refuge of sorts. The library did have several good books on sobriety and alcoholism and recovery. The books were not as popular as the Urban fiction or the hip-hop magazines. For example, Dr. Bob and the Good Oldtimers is a classic Alcoholics Anonymous book. It was checked out only eight times between 1995 and October 2009 and only once from April 2005 to October 2009.

 

Sadly, the anti-sobriety messages also were distributed by the program staff at the jail. They permit offenders who had their probation revoked – even dope dealers and those without any documented need for alcohol treatment – priority access to the taxpayer-funded alcohol programs. These are the same people who failed drug and alcohol tests after already having been released early once! Not once is any priority given to people who actually want to take the publicly funded programs. And that is the crux of recovery: A person has to WANT to change. Coerced treatment is a well-documented failure.

Yet, jails/prisons will always have the required headcount in those programs. Sometimes inmates cannot even get past the waiting list. Are we fixing the right people?

And are we fixing them at all? I struggle with this flawed system because we’re told to be sober by people who have no clue what it is like to be Alcoholic, and we’re told to succeed in sobriety among people who have no intention of embracing it.

We succeed in real recovery when we find a reason—a meaning—in sobriety. In jail- and prison-run programs you’re instructed to be happy when what we really need is a reason to be happy. It’s like having your picture taken. You can be told to say, “Cheese.” But the great pictures are when the smile is one you had reason to wear. You wear a smile when you learn to cope with shame and guilt. Prison works on the premise that you will be shamed into compliance.

In an exit interview the program director for the Corrections alcohol program I was in admitted two things. She said, “This is the only exposure most inmates get for alcohol problems,” and in practically the next sentence added, “On average a person has 13 programs before sobriety.” Not recovery, but sobriety. I don’t think these two facts are unrelated. If they go through 13 programs, you pay 13 times. Could the money be better used in prevention and education outside the fences? 

Corrections is in the role of warehousing humans with varying levels of Antisocial Behavior Disorders. Sociopaths. Dr. Marc Schuckit, author of “Alcohol & Sociopathy: Diagnostic Confusion,” in the Quarterly Journal of Studies on Alcohol, put it this way. “It is necessary to distinguish between the alcoholic who engages in a limited sphere of antisocial behavior and of the antisocial who abuses alcohol as part of his behavior. The process and prognosis of these different varieties are distinct. (Ironically, the issue of Dr. Schuckit’s article I accessed was in a corrections’s own library, stamped, “Bureau of Program Services.” Perhaps they hadn’t yet gotten around to reading the 1973 article, as they make no effort to make such a distinction. Why, because corrections is in the business of warehousing sociopaths. Not in the “treatment” business for a complex medical and biochemical disease like Alcoholism. The judiciary doles out the punishment. The jail’s role isn’t punishment, it is housing those who are being punished.

There's a corrections saying: “You don’t go there for punishment, you go there as punishment.” Corrections is no more equipped to handle real treatment than an auto mechanic is trained as a French pastry chef. They are two different disciplines. And you wouldn’t pay Mr. Mechanic for his cooking. But you are paying billions for ineffective programs run by corrections with your tax dollars with sometimes toxic results.

Couch, the intoxicated driving murderer in Texas, wasn't heading for treatment for an alcohol use disorder.

Now, on to the sentence... no ice cream there either.

_______

As long as the public appetite is in favor of incarcerating intoxicated drivers, should a judge have such wide latitude to dole out an alternative like Couch got: Probation? No. If the public thinks jail sentences are a deterrent for drinking and driving, that is the will of the public. I know several offenders through the course of my work who did not murder a soul or dent a fender and spent time behind bars.

No sentence will bring the dead to life... but someone did kill them. And they call them “crashes” instead of “accidents” because it was no accident. An impaired person decided to drive a one-ton weapon into four people when he turned the key in the ignition... he just hadn't hit them yet.

Do longer sentences act as a deterrent? Not likely. Alcohol-related traffic deaths rose nationwide from 2011 to 2012 according to National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) figures despite a slew of enhanced laws including stricter sentences. And guess what: As awful a place as it is, the environment just is not a deterrent. Not for people who like living that way. It isn’t much of a deterrent for the six or eight percent of us who have alcoholism either because, if we have no fear of drinking ourselves to death, prison isn’t going to scare us too much, either.

That said, the law was broken, and the public said Couch should be incarcerated for his crime, not sent to Lindsay Lohan's treatment center. At a minimum, the families got a really cold, harsh slap in the face with Couch's slap on the wrist.

The Criminal Justice system is full of painters when it comes to jailing and rehabilitating intoxicated motorists. The real world’s treatment process, where there are consenting, active participants in the recovery process is full of eye doctors. A painter lets you see the world as he sees it. An eye doctor will let you see the world as it really is more clearly.

What we're seeing clearly in Texas is no ice cream, but something being spoonfed to the public and the surviving families that smells a lot like cow shi

www.alcohologist.com

Details on the third literary award for Every Silver Lining Has a Cloud, plus the new radio interview replay is available at alcohologist.com... and please read the new interview with Scott Stevens at Christoph Fisher Books.  Mr. Fisher is an acclaimed international historical fiction novelist from the UK. 

10,000 deaths, 100 percent preventable

Bookended by Thanksgiving and New Year's Day – the two deadliest days on the road – is National Impaired Driving Awareness Month. During the entire year, an average of 25 people are killed each day by intoxicated motorists. During the holidays, the average jumps to 45 per day. All are preventable with existing technology.

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) is a sponsor of the campaign, along with Mothers Against Drunk Drivers (MADD) and the Governors’ Highway Safety Association. In the United States the NHTSA estimates the nearly 10,000 people killed in alcohol-related collisions, represented a third of total traffic deaths. One out of every 10 arrests for all crimes in the U.S. were for Operating While Impaired (OWI), accounting for 1 out of every 80 licensed drivers. The death toll is higher than the previous year, despite tougher penalties and more enforcement.

Most addiction professionals prefer the term “Operating While Impaired” over “Drunk Driving” because often “drunk” is a subjective term, but there's an objective legal standard for impairment. No distinction is ever assessed whether the driver is an alcohol abuser or has the disease of alcoholism: If you are impaired, you are under arrest.

Drunk or buzzed driving is the act of operating or driving a motor vehicle while under the influence of alcohol or drugs while motor skills are impaired. In the United States, the point of impairment is pegged at .08 Blood Alcohol Concentration (BAC). However, studies have demonstrated that motor-skill impairment begins at much lower BACs. Reaction time is 1/5 of a second for an unimpaired driver. With alcohol in the system, reaction time is slowed to 4/5 of a second at .06 BAC. At 60 mph, a second means 88 feet. A fifth of a second is 17.5 feet, 4/5 of a second is 70.4 feet. The Jetta slamming on the brakes in front of an impaired driver is 53 feet closer, reaction-time wise, compared to an unimpaired driver.

The specific criminal offense is usually called driving under the influence (DUI), and in some states driving while intoxicated (DWI), operating while impaired (OWI), or operating a vehicle under the influence (OVI). The first jurisdiction in the U.S.to adopt laws against drunk driving was New York in 1910, with California and others following. Early laws simply prohibited driving while intoxicated, requiring proof of a state of intoxication with no specific definition of what level of intoxication qualified.

The first generally-accepted legal BAC limit was .15. In the US, most of the laws and penalties were greatly enhanced starting in the late 1970s, and through the 1990s, largely due to pressure from groups like MADD, leading to a national standard of .08 as the definition of impairment.

A May 2013 hearing by the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) produced ideas for reducing drinking and driving deaths, among the ideas, lowering the limit legal for driving from .08 to .05 BAC. One hundred other countries have lower BAC limits for driving than the U.S. The idea is being debated around the country because the board has no authority to make the recommendation a law.

The last time the NTSB recommended a BAC change, from .10 to .08, it took two decades and the threat of Congress withholding highway funds for the idea to become law in all 50 states. An Indiana state legislator, Senator Michael Crider, R-Greenfield, predicts that is what it will take again. "If you look at the percentile drops, it's a pretty significant drop in the legal driving limit for drunk driving. It's going to be something not necessarily real popular, based on what I saw last time."

MADD, an expected ally of the proposed lower limit, is not behind it, instead focusing on its own three-pronged agenda for reducing impaired driving. The NHTSA also opposes the change to .05. Republican leaders on Capitol Hill say, "Leave it to the states to decide."

The states so far have voiced resistance. The Governors Highway Safety Association, which represents state highway safety offices, says expect push back because, “It was very difficult to get .08 in most states so lowering it again won’t be popular,” according to Jonathan Adkins, an official with the states' group. “The focus in the states is on high content offenders as well as repeat offenders. We expect industry will also be very vocal about keeping the limit at .08.”

The industry, via the American Beverage Institute, expectedly called the proposal "ludicrous."

Wyoming Gov. Matt Mead told the Associated Press he would prefer to increase penalties for drunken drivers, but he is willing to study the recommendation. However, Mike Moser, of the State Liquor Association, said the change could criminalize social drinking. Moser said it makes more sense to crack down on heavy drinkers who are more dangerous behind the wheel, an idea that does not register with a Chicago trauma surgeon who notes impairment begins far earlier than severe intoxication. Dr. Thomas Esposito, chief of the Division of Trauma, Surgical Critical Care and Burns in the Department of Surgery at Loyola University Medical Center, says, "The rationalization by critics that it penalizes the person who only occasionally has 'one too many' or who only drinks 'socially' makes no sense. One too many is just that; it's about impairment, not the number of drinks."

Lab research indicates at 0.02 to 0.05 BAC, the ability to see or locate moving lights correctly is reduced as is reaction time and the ability to judge distance. Even if not obviously impaired, at 0.05 BAC drivers are twice as likely to have a crash as before they started drinking...At 0.08 BAC drivers are five times more likely to have a crash than before they started drinking. Over .08, the crash likelihood jumps to 10 times that of a sober driver.

Highway alcohol-related deaths are 100 percent preventable. Passive alcohol detectors can measure a driver's BAC before starting the vehicle and render it unable to start. If the driver is intoxicated, he isn't driving. Critics claim the technology has not been perfected. However, the technology already exists for the non-invasive technique (see related examiner article), although the public appetite for the device does not.

Mandating these in-car alcohol detectors – the way seatbelts and airbags are required in U.S. cars – was among the 20 ideas the NTSB proposed at the same time as lowering the BAC threshold for drinking and driving. Detroit automakers have been testing in-dash systems since June 2012. The idea was suggested three years ago in the book What the Early Worm Gets as the way to conclusively eliminate all drinking and driving accidents.

“Our goal is to get to zero deaths because each alcohol-impaired death is preventable,” NTSB Chairman Deborah Hersman said. “They can and should be prevented. The tools exist. What is needed is the will.”

In 2011, 9,858 people were killed, 350,000 injured and $132 billion spent as a result of "alcohol-related" crashes. To Esposito's point, such classification does not mean the driver was over the .08 BAC limit, although usually that is the case, only that alcohol was present at the scene or detected on the breath or blood. No determination has to be made regarding level of intoxication, alcohol abuse or the disease of alcoholism but 4 million motorists admit to driving while impaired, according to NTSB estimates.
--from examiner.com (See full article)
www.alcohologist.com

Details on the third literary award for Every Silver Lining Has a Cloud, plus the new radio interview replay is available at alcohologist.com... and please read the new interview with Scott Stevens at Christoph Fisher Books.  Mr. Fisher is an acclaimed international historical fiction novelist from the UK.