YARDLEY, Pa., May 28, 2009 (UPI via COMTEX) -- Intoxication is not always
obvious, experts at an independently-owned U.S. consulting firm say.
The review, scheduled to be published in September's Alcoholism: Clinical &
Experimental Research, says "obvious intoxication" as defined in some courts is
not always the same as "visible intoxication."
"While most people would use these terms interchangeably to mean that someone
was clearly drunk, laws in some states differentiate between the terms," lead
author John Brick of Intoxikon International in Yardley, Pa., said in a
statement.
"For example, in some states 'obvious' intoxication means that if someone has
consumed a large number of drinks, it should be obvious that they are
intoxicated and not capable of driving," Brick said. "Other state laws define
'visible' intoxication as specific types of behavior, such as trouble walking,
slurred speech and other common signs of alcohol intoxication."
Brick said reliable signs of intoxication are present by casual observation at a
blood alcohol concentration of 150 mg/dl or more -- even in most
alcohol-tolerant -- but signs of visible intoxication in most drinkers are not
reliably present at a blood alcohol concentration of less than 150 mg/dl.
"How do you intervene or make an informed decision about driving with someone if
they do not appear visibly intoxicated?" Brick asks. "People who are too
impaired to drive are not typically staggering, slurring their speech, or
presenting gross signs of intoxication."
URL: www.upi.com
Copyright 2009 by United Press International