How do Phenylketonurics and Phenylalanine present in some common
breath strips affect breath alcohol test (BAC) results. I need
specific articles etc.. that indicate that a breath alcohol test taken
right after using breath strips which contain Phenylketonurics and/or
Phenylalanine would give a false (higher content) than if a test was
done when no breath strips had been used.

Hi sachaa~

Interesting question! I just had a conversation with my brother-in-law
the police officer, who was telling me that Listerine breath strips
do, indeed, cause a false positive if taken just before a test.
(During his training, some officers were asked to put some strips in
their mouth and then take a breath-alcohol test...The results were
positive.)

"Breath sprays, such as Binaca, have a high concentration of alcohol
in them. Binaca can even cause a false breath-alcohol test result of
0.811% BAC, which is nearly double a fatal dose of alcohol poisoning.
Incidentally, Listerine mouthwash can cause a false breath-alcohol
test result of 0.43% BAC, which is near the level of coma. These
effects last as long as 30 minutes to an hour." (The Prohibition
Times, JUNK SCIENCE: GOVERNMENT TESTS FOR DRUNK DRIVING by John Lee	,
http://www.geocities.com/prohibition_us/BacFst.html )

This legal article sites some of those statistics, too:
http://216.239.39.100/search?q=cache:ozb5zzmp_g0C:www.law.fsu.edu/journals/lawreview/downloads/244/snyder.pdf+%22breath+alcohol+test%22+listerine&hl=en&ie=UTF-8

However, I can find no stats online that *specifically* discuss the
breath strips. Since they are made from an intensified version of
Listerine, it is only natural that they, like the traditional
Listerine,  result in a false-positive.

If this answers your question sufficiently, I'll trust you to let me
know so I can post it as an official answer.

Good luck!
kriswrite

The typical police agency is supposed to observe a waiting period
(often 15 minutes) before administering a breath test, for the purpose
of trying to ensure that the subject doesn't have any foreign
substances in his mouth, including anything the subject might
regurgitate. If a breath strip were consumed within that observation
period, technically speaking the police should start a new observation
period. (Intentionally consuming items to confound the waiting period
would likely be regarded as a "refusal".)

Outside of the waiting period, the biggest problems come for people
with oral appliances (dentures, retainers, etc.) which can capture a
contaminant (e.g., mouthwash), people with mouth sores that allow an
amount of blood to enter the mouth, or insulin-dependent diabetics,
and people on certain medications, all of which can result in a false
positive.

I have not yet heard any lawyers raise aspartame as a possible source
of false positives, despite the presence of aspartame-based diet pop
on the market for a considerable number of years. It will be
interesting to see what research on this topic turns up.

Police Officers in Virginia must observe the arrestee for 30 minutes.
Belching, vomiting, hiccuping, etc. invalidates the observation time
and starts the clock again...

In Virginia, the magistrate has authority to require an arrestee to
take a blood test if they feel it is necessary. Other states are
probably similar and if you are arrested for DUI and have one of these
things in your mouth or whatever, you could request the magistrate to
order a blood test instead of a breath test. Ultimately though, it is
the decision of the magistrate to order breath or blood tests or both.

BAC, in hosptial terminology, usually refers to "Blood Alcohol
Content" and not breathalyzer type testing. BAC is much more
definitive than breathalyzer results, and not affected by mouthwash at
all. (Unless the mouthwash is consumed!)Breathalyzer results should be
used for screening purposes (qualitative), and are not a good measure
of alcohol quantitation.

I am a scientist in addition to being a Virginia DUI defense attorney.
 My comments are based on the comments posted by others to the
question.  I believe it will shed some light on the intricacies
involved.

-Police Officers in Virginia must observe the arrestee for 20 minutes
- not 30- prior to administration of the breath test on the Virginia
approved Intoxilizer 5000 machine.  The Virginia Administrative Code
details the obersvation periods required.

Belching, vomiting, hiccuping, etc. does not invalidate the
observation time, but calls for the breath test operator to initiate a
new 20 minute period.  I say "calls for" as some judges allow to a
more constricted obersvation time due to Virginia's substantial
compliance allowance in obtaining samples from detainees.  In essence,
the standard for admisibility of a BAC certificate, based on an a
breath/blood sample, is not strict adherence to procedural issues such
as the 20 minute observation period.

In Virginia, the magistrate has no authority to require an arrestee to
take a blood test if they feel it is necessary - the decision to
consent to the having a sample taken is that of the detainee. 
However, Virginia does have an implied consent statute which indicates
that all persons impliedly consent to testing if arrested for DUI. 
Indeed, the detainee can refuse all testing all together - she will be
charged with both the DUI and Refusal, an administrative charge.

Being a defense attorney for Virginia DUI cases, I sometimes conclude
that a detainee charged with DUI and Refusal is in better shoes than
another person charged with a DUI in which there is a BAC certificate.
 With the mandatory jail time in Virginia DUI cases, post July 1,
2004, for BACs above 0.15, being charged with Refusal and DUI (a DUI
in which there is no BAC certificate) may be an important distinction
with explicit legal ramifications.

Sudeep Bose, Esq.
http://www.vatrafficlaw.com