Talk:Blood alcohol content

message: A man was found today unconscious, but alive with a .552 BAC, meaning the chart's description of >.5 as being deadly is wrong. http://fox8.com/2012/03/28/police-say-man-had-staggering-bac-of-552/
137.148.234.164 (talk) 17:17, 28 March 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: It says "High possibility of death", so it's not wrong. Also, I had a BAC of 0.15-0.16 (per two BAC calculators) and threw up like 4 times; it was a blur, felt like dying, and gum got stuck to my shirt. So that part of the chart is true. --User123o987name (talk) 09:04, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: Chart issue

message: The "Units of measurement" table states: 1/10,000 g/mL = 1 mg/100mL
This is obviously wrong, 1/10,000 g/mL = 1 mg/10mL  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.207.29.2 (talk) 12:56, 26 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: another error

message: The info at the bottom of the article on the North Dakota woman (0.708% alcohol level) is wrong as per reference 37. She was found drunk in a stolen car 2 weeks later, not the next day.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.236.68.2 (talk) 11:45, 28 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: error

message: I'm new to this and perhaps overstepped.  I noticed some ambiguity, confusion and errors in regard to the units discussed in the first paragraph and corrected them before discovering the "talk" page.  First, the article mentioned that the BAC is "unit-less", but then goes on to discuss in detail the many units that may be used to report the BAC measurement. I re-worded to clear up the confusion.  The reference to the California Code said California reports BAC in units of grams per milliliter; I corrected that to read the correct grams per 100 milliliters (which is, of course, the same as grams per deciliter).  Further, as the article went on to mention the several types of units of measure of blood alcohol and breath alcohol, the same value was used for each unit discussed.  I could see how someone might get the impression that .08 grams per deciliter of blood was the same volume as .08 mg/L of breath, so I changed the values to reflect the same volume for each unit of measure mentioned.  (i.e., 0.10 g/dL of blood alcohol is the same BAC as 0.476 mg/L of breath alcohol and the same as 0.10 g/210L of breath alcohol).  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.13.196.86 (talk) 04:10, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Units Clarification

message: The information from the fifth source on blood alcohol content doesn't add up. I went to the Virginia Tech Page and the table doesn't add up.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 164.58.61.74 (talk) 10:04, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: The Fifth Source

message: The section on BAC Calculation needs to be edited and expanded: 
There should ba a clear opening statement about BAC being a percentage measurement of ethanol per blood volume of the individual, adjusted for time duration since last consumption.  
There should be a clear representation of the Widmark formula, with all its complexities, as well as a simplified analysis of it. 
Info about variations on the Widmark formula should be included (e.g., http://alcohol.hws.edu/researchlinks/bac.htm)
Info about Widmark should be included (e.g., http://journals.lww.com/amjforensicmedicine/Abstract/1996/09000/The_Life_and_Work_of_Erik_M__P__Widmark.1.aspx)
Info could be included about what challenges may be made to a BAC level in a legal setting (e.g., http://www.jamespublishing.com/articles_forms/DrunkDriving/attacking_widmark_calc.htm)
A link to the wikihow on how to determine your BAC might be helpful: http://www.wikihow.com/Calculate-Blood-Alcohol-Level
:Well, I'd say you're more than welcome to take a crack at it, since you do seem to be someone quite familiar with the subject.  Far more so, indeed, than I. 206.194.127.112 (talk) 22:48, 21 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Need for Additional BAC Calculation/Widmark Info

message: Looking over this article from the viewpoint of someone unfamiliar with the topic at hand (ljokjmpokmpokmpokm-okmokmpokmpokmpkmplmplkmpokmpokmpokmokmpokm]]) 01:11, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Lack of Context

message: After reading the story about the Rhode Island guy --> http://news.aol.com/article/cops-mans-blood-alcohol-level-was-491/95132?icid=100214839x1205968170x1200314816
I got to wondering, what's the highest ever recorded BAC without dying?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.193.246.87 (talk) 00:45, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Record?

message: Re: "Despite the liberal intoxication limits of many countries, one should not assume that driving with a BAC rating of, say, .079 is as safe as driving while sober. At a BAC rating of 0.05, the probability of a driver having an accident is more than four times its base level. Despite this, some drivers believe their driving actually improves with small amounts of alcohol. This assertion is false, because their ability to accurately judge the quality of their driving (measured by actual motor competence) deteriorates."
This seems somewhat POV to me, at least in tone. It sounds like someone from MADD wrote this, especially the italicized "four times." I think it should be tweaked or at least footnoted with some solid sources.
: Def should be, seems to be a POV agaisnt alcohol. --68.45.219.63 (talk) 09:05, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  POV? 

message: In the table that lists the number of alcoholic beverages and its affects, what unit of time would that go under?  Within a day?  Within an hour?  I mean, five drinks in a stretched amount of time doesn't have the same affect is it does within a shorter time period.
I agree, the table says:
 
12 Drinks=.30-.40% BAC=Loss of consciousness
I'd like to see good solid evidence of this, a BAC of .3 to .4 can cause a loss of consciousness, but only 12 drinks to get there is a little extreme. I'm 6' and weigh 272lb, 250lb when training. During a Sunday football game, I used to consume about a 12-pack, since their is usually a double header, I might end up drinking 24 beers. If what the chart says is correct, then by the end of the first game, I should have had a BAC of .30 and be out. The highest my BAC ever has been was .45, after drinking an entire bottle of Jack Daniels. As a recovering alcoholic, I have a little experience here. Maybe there should be a time on the chart as well. -cplradar
I think it'd better to have an expanded table between the typical BAC and its affects; I found this site that describes several levels and a fairly detailed explainations  
My360pi 22:29, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Clear Up a Little Confusion 

message: As discussed in this page, there are several units for BAC. Could we please either tidy up the usage of units through the article, or better, fully state the units at every usage. For instance. The section "Effect at different levels" gives no units other that "%". Although the units section does say that just "%" on its own means % w/w, g/100g isn't the only one measured in %, and since the difference between the % units is a power of 10, it can be quite confusing. It also standard that if you use a %, you state whether you mean w/w, w/v, or v/v.
If nothing else, can we change it from saying something like "0.50%" in every row to "0.5" in the row and adding "% (g/100g)" or "% w/w" to the column header cell.
Personally, I think that since ICAP uses mg/ml as a standard unit, that should be the unit used whenever possible through the article. Here's an example ICAP report. The units through it are mg/ml as seen in the table of BAC's legal to drive in different countries.
http://www.icap.org/portals/0/download/all_pdfs/ICAP_Reports_English/report11.pdf --KX36 12:01, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  including units 

message: * Countries with a 0.08% limit include Republic of Ireland, the United States[1] and Canada.[2] In the United States, operators of common carriers, such as buses, are restricted to a 0.10% limit, and the Federal Aviation Regulations governing U.S. pilots prohibit operation of an aircraft within eight hours of consumption or while having as little as 0.04 percent of alcohol by weight in the blood.[3] For further information on US laws, see Alcohol laws of the United States by state.
So bus operators are allowed more alcohol than private drivers?? Mtford 22:11, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Limits for US bus drivers 

message: I have moved the UK back into the 0.08% bracket from 0.05%. I also added Malta and Luxembourgh. I don't know why the UK was moved to 0.05%. (Ajkgordon 10:09, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  UK limit 

message: Interesting one. The limit is 0.08% for an outright ban but there are punishments for 0.05% to 0.08% also, i.e. six points and a fine. I'll see if I can add some text with an English reference. (Ajkgordon 10:09, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  France limit 

message: I came to wikipedia looking to see if BAC is precisely correlated with intoxication level; i.e., that if someone's BAC is higher than it should be due to taking a drug that slows ingestion as mentioned in the article, resulting in a higher BAC, has the drug actually caused greater intoxication (impairment of motor skills, etc.)? Or has the drug simply elevated the BAC but the person is no more affected by the alcohol than if he had not taken the medication? 
Some info would help clarify. 71.162.92.26 02:59, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: information on actual meaning of BAC and intoxication

message: Red Zone (Intoxication) appears to be a subtopic of this article and should either be merged into this article or deleted as non-notable and original research. ✤ JonHarder talk 17:39, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge proposal 

message: How is this in any way remotely helpful?
1 g/kg = 1 g kg-1 = 1 g/L = 100mg/dL = 1 mg/cc = 100 mg% = 1 decigrams% = 0.1 g% = 0.1% = 1 ‰
Something like this needs elaboration, it can't just be stuck into an article by itself and expected to be understood by the general readership. DMCer (talk) 11:02, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  "The following formula..." 

message: The first paragraph says that BAC is usually measured as mass / volume. However the example given says .02 grams (a unit of mass) over 100 grams (another unit of mass). Which one is it? Ce1984 (talk) 00:55, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  First paragraph 

message: Given that FAA rules allow commercial airline pilots to fly at up to 0.039%, this article’s table should be revised. I see that it is based on Virginia Tech data, but to say that a BAC of 0.01% causes impairments is ludicrous and comes across as just another example of the mentality that brought about Reefer Madness. Wikipedia’s table should incorporate data from other sources. I suggest a good starting place is the FAA’s take on on the subject (Federal Aviation Regulation (CFR) 91.17, Table 2, here). The FAA’s binned values overlap, but by interpolating, it effectivly states that at BAC values of <0.03%, the “average individual appears normal” and does not suffer from impaired judgement or other ill effects.  No legitimate case can be made here for simply parroting data from a single source if that data flies in the face of common sense (like impairment at 0.01%). That’s horse crap. Cautions to young people on the effects of alchohol must be factual to be credible.  Greg L (my talk) 04:55, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: It may not be completely consistent, but it is cited from an external source.  If we change the wording, then we are changing the findings of the external source, which I think is a bit of a gray area.  On the whole, though, I don't think the table as it stands now is unclear.  Comments? 206.194.127.112 (talk) 22:46, 21 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Table of effects, OK below 0.03%

message: :"It is usually measured as mass per volume. For example, a BAC of 0.02% means 0.2 ‰ (permille) or 0.02 grams of alcohol per 100 grams of individual's blood, or 0.2 grams of alcohol per 1000 grams of blood." (first paragraph)
This is a bad example because the gram ("per 100 grams") is a unit of mass, not a unit of volume.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.175.215.29 (talk) 20:02, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Yup. – Acdx (talk) 18:07, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Per Volume 

message: The article states: "Alcohol in non-carbonated beverages is absorbed more slowly than alcohol in carbonated drinks." Is there any evidence for this and an explanation of the body physiology as to why that is the case? 194.46.229.87 (talk) 11:28, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Carbonated reference? 

message: The table containing different countries' legal BAC limits is a bit confusing. Do the "general" lines not specifying a specific country belong to the country that is listed above them? Since they are not general rules applying to all countries I would guess so, but the table could be made clearer. An example of this would be the line "• learner drivers and provisional/probationary drivers". I am suggesting to maybe remove the dividing line between these items, to show that they belong together. 83.255.186.163 (talk) 16:10, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Table for legal limits of BAC 

message: The Canadian legal BAC is .05, .08 is simply a more serious offense. I just don't know where it says this, I know it because I got pulled over.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.150.109.112 (talk) 04:31, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Canadian Limit 

message: None of my dictionaries define "jamee", used in the second sentence: "It is usually measured as jamee mass per volume.". Could somebody knowledgeable please fix this? Robsavoie (talk) 17:44, 22 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unknown word 

message: What is severe euphoria, is it a real word?24.65.95.239 (talk) 03:06, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: It's grammatically correct. Implies euphoria beyond what one would consider "standard" euphoria. However the wording itself is goofy, in my opinion. Were it me I would say "heigtened euphoria" or "irrational euphoria." Jersey John (talk) 17:30, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Severe Euphoria

message: Everyone is so focused on the weight of a TINY woman. A 90 pound woman getting a 0.30 is unbelievable? BAC is RELATIVE. It is a measure that gives a pretty much absolute number by dividing out relative numbers against each other. All the things that apply to a 90 pound woman with a 0.30 also apply to a 400 pound man with a 0.30 rating. The only thing that differs is their weights. And, as a consequence, the numbers of drinks they've had. With a 0.30, both the woman and the man are "just as drunk" in most cases...
Of course, news agencies always use that fact. Because most of the general population doesn't seem to get this. It sounds much more impressive to have a 90 pound woman blow a 0.30 than a 400 pound man. But, really, there's NO DIFFERENCE. And, in this way, the news agencies keep contributing to the ignorance. 24.160.69.161 (talk) 23:58, 4 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  It's relative 

message: No description of the correlation between BAC and the alcohol level in breast milk?  http://www.breastfeeding.asn.au/bfinfo/ABA_Alchohol_BF.pdf Josh Parris 06:12, 29 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Breast milk 

message: Why measure some BrAC values in 100 mcg/100 mL and some in 1000mcg/1000mL (@ 'Limits by country')? Equality of units! I changed it a couple of days ago, but then someone came along and reverted it, saying: "It's not constructive." It may indeed be not the most constructive of edits, but it's useful and an improvement. The so-called 'anti-vandalism' gestapo should have its limits.
: Errr, yes, sorry about that mate. I didn't mean to offend and have no problem with your edits. I accidentally mistook it as vandalism.I will happily remove the warning, and please accept a full apology.--Acather96 (talk) 22:03, 25 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text:  Heh, ok. No problem, apology accepted! Keep up the good work.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.86.1.101 (talk) 19:26, 26 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Equality of Units 

message: I found this article highly confusing to read.  I have only just started to read it and already I am confused by
1.  A statemment in the header which clearly indicates that Blood alcohol content is abbreviated as BAC but then later the article talks about Breath alcohol content (a different measure) also using the abbreviation BAC.  If both acronyms are used by different authorities around the world, then this article SHOULD NOT use either acronym as it is confusing to the reader. If there is an internationally agreed alternate abbreviation nomenclature that avoids this, then the article should use that abbreviation nomenclature instead. It would be a simple matter to include a table indicating what usually BAC means in each country if there is a standard interpretation in each nation. 
2.  The header begins by saying that blood alcohol content is usually measured using ONE method, but then it goes on to show that blood alcohol content is actually measured in a variety of ways. This is very unhelpful to the reader as we do not know what "usually" means. My immediate inclination was to remove the reference to "usually" and simply explain that there is a multitude of measurements in the field and explain briefly what they are (at least in the header section). 
3. There is a table that gives BAC as a percentage!  This presumable is meaningless without a clue as to whether this is the ethanol percentage by WEIGHT or by VOLUME. These figues cannot be the same unless blood and alcohol have the same density (which I very much doubt).
I am assuming that there is broad equivalence between these different measures.  A conversion table from one unit to the other would be useful. 
Comments please!--Hauskalainen (talk) 10:18, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree with all of these. The article is very confusing. – Acdx (talk) 18:05, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lack of consistency makes this article confusing 

message: If 1 drink contains 20-30ml of alcohol (2-3 uk units), and a typical person has 5000ml (5L) of blood that's 0.5% alcohol vol. per blood vol.
According to the charts this is severe intoxication, after just 1 typical drink!
This is approximately 10 times higher than I would have expected, after 1 drink.
I suspect the resolution is that the BAC given in the charts is not strictly the unitless percentage as stated at the top of the article, but in fact g/kg, ml/L or g/L, or something similar. If so it should be made much clearer that the % number is not representing anything like the true volume fraction of alcohol in the blood, but something closer to 1/10 of the volume fraction. i.e. 0.02 '%'  BAC is actually 0.2% true volume i.e. 0.2 in every 100 ml of your blood is alcohol.
If I am correct the BAC % given in the tables this should be labelled according to it's definition e.g. 100*ml/L, not simply %.
The only other resolution i can see is if only approximatley 10% of alcohol consumed reaches the bloodstream. In which case this should be stated.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lawrie.skinner (talk • contribs) 16:28, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Factor of 10 and BAC definition 

message: should this term appear in this article?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.87.137.127 (talk) 12:52, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Not really. – Acdx (talk) 18:06, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Whiskey Dick 

message: I've seen the .15-.20 (g/dl/h) metabolism rate around the internet, in addition to the approximate "One standard drink an hour" which falls in that rate, but I've never seen a source. 
KATER, RODERICK M. H., CARULLI, NICOLA, IBER, FRANK L.
Differences in the Rate of Ethanol Metabolism in Recently Drinking Alcoholic and Nondrinking Subjects
Am J Clin Nutr 1969 22: 1608-1617
(which can be found here ) 
seems to put the average for light drinkers at 25 mg/(100 ml)/hr or 0.025 g / dl /hr and roughly .05g/dl/hr for alcoholics!
Is the conventional wisdom wrong? or is this just an statistical outlier? I'm not a biologist or statistician  so I don't know. 
Should the page be updated to reflect this study, or are there other more reputable studies that give the lower rate?
EDIT: I then found this study from Germany that seems to put the average around the .015 mark. Now I'm just confused. 
 70.187.185.5 (talk) 22:49, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rate of Alcohol Metabolism... Underestimated? 

message: "The relative proportion disposed of in each way varies from person to person, but typically about 92 to 98% is metabolised, 10% is excreted in urine,[24] and 1 to 5% evaporates through the breath."
^-- Actually... 92% + 10% + 1% = 103%... There is something wrong...
Maybe the metabolism is 82% to 88%?
Please double-check!  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.121.145.105 (talk) 04:25, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Metabolism inconsistency 

message: So the Legal Limit table is certainly a great idea, but it is extremely misleading regarding at the least the United States. Yes, there is some mention of the variation between states, but I am unaware of a state that does not allow a DUI conviction at 0.05% (technically, a conviction can come at 0.0% at least in some states, even if it is only alcohol).
Yes, I am aware that the phrase 'legal limits' is used, possibly implying the upper most limit, but such a term is misleading at best, and possibly dangerous.
In the case of the United States, I therefore suggest it should be clearly stated that the offense of driving while intoxicated is committed when a driver's BAC meets or exceeds 0.08%, but that in many (most?) states, the same offense is committed when a driver tests at 0.05%, along with other evidence, such as a failed Field Sobriety Test.
I generally dislike being this picky, but the misleading term 'legal limit' really could be dangerous under these circumstances. Snideology (talk) 21:41, 4 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  US Legal Limits 

message: Lists a person who the police presume to have consumed 10-14 drinks (less than a bottle of hard liquor!) in 1-2 hours... and consider the highest living BAC they've ever seen. What gives? Any cop who has been dispatched on any single given domestic disturbance or hooliganism by minors call is more likely than not to encounter one or more persons who have had more drinks in the last hour or two!  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.127.80.59 (talk) 22:13, 11 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  BAC "Records" 

message: "There have been reported cases of blood alcohol content higher than 1.00. In March 2009, a 45-year-old man was admitted to the hospital in Skierniewice, Poland, after being struck by a car. The blood test showed blood alcohol content at 1.23. The man survived but did not remember either the accident or the circumstances of his alcohol consumption"
No "In March 2009" but "In December 2004" - http://forum.gazeta.pl/forum/w,20,18797889,18797889,Wiadomosc_z_RMF_PAP_12_3_promila_alkoholu_we_krwi.html?v=2  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.163.31.45 (talk) 12:47, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Highest recorded blood alcohol level/content

message: Could someone explain why this was removed?
:In 1995, a man in Wrocław, Poland, had a car accident. At the hospital, his BAC was determined to be 1.48%. Concerned that their equipment was malfunctioning, doctors also performed five separate lab tests, all of which confirmed the man's blood alcohol content. He died a few days later from wounds from the car accident. Police were baffled as to how an individual could attain such a high blood alcohol. Later, police discussions with his brother in-law revealed that he had "beer bonged" pure grain alcohol allegedly stolen from his place of work, a chemical plant.[46]
Dforest (talk) 08:12, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Highest BAC - Wroclaw man 

message: The current EBAC formula in the text is a misunderstanding of reference 5 written at a Swedish university. In Sweden a standard drink is 12g alcohol not 10g as in USA. So naturally the Swedish authors had to adjust the standard Widmark formula by multiplying the number of standard drinks  with 12/10 = 1.2. So if the standard drink is 10g the formula should not include this multiplication with 1.2.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 31.209.20.40 (talk) 10:35, 12 October 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Error in EBAC formula 

message: The law in Israel is 240 micrograms per liter of air (or 50 milligrams per 100ml of blood), not milligrams. Math probably needs to be checked.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.52.60.229 (talk) 14:22, 3 April 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Micrograms vs milligrams 

message: I'm going to remove the "Definitions" section as it's confusing and contradictory. Most of what it seems to be trying to say is already covered in other sections. Kendall-K1 (talk) 18:36, 13 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Definitions 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Blood alcohol content. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070505032342/http://www.alcohol.vt.edu:80/Students/alcoholEffects/index.htm to http://www.alcohol.vt.edu/Students/alcoholEffects/index.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070630210916/http://www.alcohol.vt.edu:80/Students/alcoholEffects/estimatingBAC/index.htm to http://www.alcohol.vt.edu/Students/alcoholEffects/estimatingBAC/index.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081201204348/http://www2.securiteroutiere.gouv.fr/ressources/conseils/l-alcool-au-volant.html to http://www2.securiteroutiere.gouv.fr/ressources/conseils/l-alcool-au-volant.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080202030005/http://driving-in-singapore.spf.gov.sg:80/services/Driving_in_Singapore/Information/pressandmsg/drinkdriving.htm to http://driving-in-singapore.spf.gov.sg/services/Driving_in_Singapore/Information/pressandmsg/drinkdriving.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20091007031505/http://www.sefeaa.gr:80/downloads/2009/KOK.pdf to http://www.sefeaa.gr/downloads/2009/KOK.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120624052415/http://www.denverdui.com:80/drunk_driving_defense/blood_partition_ratio.html to http://www.denverdui.com/drunk_driving_defense/blood_partition_ratio.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130112204300/http://www.duiblog.com/2005/03/22/breathalyzer-inaccuracy-testing-during-the-absorptive-state/ to http://www.duiblog.com/2005/03/22/breathalyzer-inaccuracy-testing-during-the-absorptive-state/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130811065906/http://wiadomosci.gazeta.pl:80/wiadomosci/1,114871,14402847,Mial_13_74_promila_alkoholu_we_krwi__I_przezyl__Rekord.html to http://wiadomosci.gazeta.pl/wiadomosci/1,114871,14402847,Mial_13_74_promila_alkoholu_we_krwi__I_przezyl__Rekord.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071115153451/http://www.faslink.org:80/bal.htm to http://www.faslink.org/bal.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:41, 4 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Blood alcohol content. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20101009071421/http://lci.tf1.fr/france/2005-02/volant-record-controle-absolu-4859363.html to http://lci.tf1.fr/france/2005-02/volant-record-controle-absolu-4859363.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:07, 22 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Are you sure the formula is correct for this one? I've tried using it several times, but every time I've done so, multiplying it by 10 at the end seems to produce the wrong result. Leaving it without multiplying seems to produce far more reasonable results. Please double check it. 188.113.103.230 (talk) 22:30, 5 August 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Estimated blood alcohol content by intake 

message: We may need to add a section to the article. Serum vs plasma vs whole blood analysis can have levels vary approximately 10-15%. This can be relevant to legal or academic matters. MartinezMD (talk) 14:31, 25 October 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Testing techniques 

message: A BAC of 0.0 may be 0.045 rounded. With 0.03 I feel definitely not sober 62.194.222.221 (talk) 11:28, 27 February 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: I changed it to 0, it is supposed to be exact. Mathnerd314159 (talk) 16:35, 27 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  "a BAC of 0.0 is sober"