Bilzer N, Sprung R, Schewe G
Institut für Rechtsmedizin, Christian-Albrechts-Universität Kiel.
Blutalkohol. 1994 Jan;31(1):1-7.
Drinking experiments were performed by using a device-combination appreciated by the German National Institut of Health (BGA) as being evidential and proposed as prototype for the future practice of breath-alcohol analysis. Comparing the breath- (BrAC) and blood alcohol-concentrations (BAC), however, there were relevant deviations. Our evaluation of the facts published Schoknecht demonstrated nevertheless distinct divergences in comparison to the blood alcohol determination: A BAC-nominal of 1% gave divergences of the nominal up to 0.25% resulted from the measured BrAC-values of Schoknecht on corresponding conversion. The divergences are distinctly above those that are tolerated by legislation according to previous standards for the blood alcohol determination. Consequently it requires further checking in standardized experiments and field experiments in order to be able to judge the practice usefulness; furthermore such further checking would have to be implemented by unconcerned institutions. Basing on these experiments an evidential breath-alcohol analysis for forensic purposes has not been established yet.
使用一种被德国国家卫生研究所(BGA)认可为具有证据效力并被提议作为未来呼气酒精分析实践原型的设备组合进行了饮酒实验。然而,在比较呼气酒精浓度(BrAC)和血液酒精浓度(BAC)时,存在显著偏差。尽管如此,我们对已发表的朔克内希特研究结果的评估表明,与血液酒精测定相比仍存在明显差异:在相应换算中,朔克内希特测量的BrAC值导致BAC标称值为1%时,标称偏差高达0.25%。根据以往血液酒精测定标准,这些偏差明显高于立法所允许的范围。因此,需要在标准化实验和现场实验中进行进一步检查,以便能够判断其实际用途;此外这种进一步检查必须由无关机构实施。基于这些实验,用于法医目的的具有证据效力的呼气酒精分析尚未确立。