Live data from Hacker News

Launch HN: SannTek (YC S19) – Breathalyzer for Cannabis

news.ycombinator.com

151–160 of 421 posts

Re: Launch HN: SannTek (YC S19) – Breathalyzer for Cannabis

#151
post #29

Great job to the founders, awesome to see more cool companies out of the UW nano program. Curious why all the negativity, perhaps people are unaware that cannabis actively DOES impair driving to dangerous levels. Also, as this startup is from Canada I'm almost certain the mindframe of the founders is to develop a device that makes legalization EASIER, not allowing police to use it catch and arrest people on the stree…

Please cite actual statistics and studies that prove cannabis impairment danger.

Re: Launch HN: SannTek (YC S19) – Breathalyzer for Cannabis

#152
post #85

Is someone driving high dangerous?

Driving impaired in any way shape or form is dangerous. https://www.dailycamera.com/2016/06/09/affidavit-teen-driver...

Does smoking marijuana impair driving skills though? The assumption is yes... but is that actually the case?

Maybe the kid in the story you linked crashed due to his speeding to reach home by curfew and not because he smoked marijuana that night.

Re: Launch HN: SannTek (YC S19) – Breathalyzer for Cannabis

#153
post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do we have accurate breathalyzers for alcohol? AFAIK, the manufacturers aggressively resist requirements to publish their source code or calibrations for testing. Also, AIUI, the devices require recalibration for accuracy, and it's not clear that police stations perform such maintenance. No idea how rampant this is, every system will have flaws. But I question whether we can use the alcohol breathalyzer example witho…

If breathalyzers were inaccurate, uncalibrated, or unmaintained it would be trivial to get any conviction relying on their measurements thrown out.

Only if you're allowed to test the devices in question, and the courts believe your experts over the manufacturers.

This doesn't prove my point, but manufacturers do aggressively fight against researchers identifying flaws in their products. Given the high stakes (+ the fact this isn't a security issue, really), it seems like a major smell to me.

There are reports out there of people convicted, who are blocked from examining the devices used as the primary piece of evidence against them.

Also, after years of effort to discredit breathalyzer results, convictions ARE being overturned regularly.

NJ overturns > 27k convictions because of breathalyzer issues - https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/13/nyregion/nj-dwi-convictio...

MS judge suspends admission of breathalyzer evidence -- https://www.bostonherald.com/2019/01/10/breathalyzers-tempor...

More relevant info - https://www.zdnet.com/article/draeger-breathalyzer-breath-te...

Re: Launch HN: SannTek (YC S19) – Breathalyzer for Cannabis

#154
post #137
post #31

I don't understand the negativity in many of the comments here. I'm all for legalization of marijuana, but I actually think that the inability to test for people driving high is a very reasonable argument against legalization. I generally feel that people should be able to make their own choices, but not if those choices involve driving a 3000 pound piece of metal down the highway while impaired. Yes, we need to be c…

I get that breathalyzers give you a nice simple, relatively objective number to point at, but shouldn't we be testing for actual impairment rather than the presence of chemicals which may or may not be an indicator of impairment?

Yes, in an ideal world we would do that. But by the time we come up with a perfect test that can be done roadside by police to determine driving impairment, that has very few false positives and holds up in court, we'll most likely have self driving cars and this won't be an issue anyway.

I understand that everyone reacts differently to different drugs. Dale Earnhardt can probably be a little tipsy and still drive better than me. But even if you are an above average driver, it's still immoral (and I think should be illegal) to use substances that will increase your risk of killing someone else in a car accident, even if you are having a small amount of those substances that just brings you down to average driver levels.

Car accidents are one of the leading causes of death. It's an inherently risky activity to be doing every day. But we've structured our society in a way that makes it unavoidable. Given that it's dangerous even for sober people, I don't think we should be giving people the right to drive under circumstances that make it even more dangerous.

Re: Launch HN: SannTek (YC S19) – Breathalyzer for Cannabis

#155

> Whereas a blood alcohol concentration of 0.08% (the legal limit in most states) might result in a concentration of 208 ppm of ethanol in the breath, a similarly impairing dose of cannabis results in 0.00001 ppm of the drug in breath. [emphasis added] From personal experience, it seems to me that cannabis and alcohol have radically different effects. How can you define a "similarly impairing dose" when they are so u…

Perhaps by comparing accident statistics for similarities in the two groups and then comparing the doses of each that lead to those similar accident outcomes?

You can also compare performance on other standard impairment measurements techniques, such as the standard field sobriety test, or driving simulators. There are a lot of studies looking at the effect of cannabis on these tests, although a lot of them suffer from really low doses. It is hard for researchers to get their hands on real world doses of cannabis for their studies because the drug is still schedule 1.

Re: Launch HN: SannTek (YC S19) – Breathalyzer for Cannabis

#156
post #137
post #31

I don't understand the negativity in many of the comments here. I'm all for legalization of marijuana, but I actually think that the inability to test for people driving high is a very reasonable argument against legalization. I generally feel that people should be able to make their own choices, but not if those choices involve driving a 3000 pound piece of metal down the highway while impaired. Yes, we need to be c…

I get that breathalyzers give you a nice simple, relatively objective number to point at, but shouldn't we be testing for actual impairment rather than the presence of chemicals which may or may not be an indicator of impairment?

The officer should still have discretion here to let someone go if they don't feel the person is impaired. But giving them a number means they can't use that discretion the opposite way, e.g. arresting someone because "they seem like they're driving high". I imagine that kind of discretion would disproportionately affect minorities, so I see this as a win.

Re: Launch HN: SannTek (YC S19) – Breathalyzer for Cannabis

#157
post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do we have accurate breathalyzers for alcohol? AFAIK, the manufacturers aggressively resist requirements to publish their source code or calibrations for testing. Also, AIUI, the devices require recalibration for accuracy, and it's not clear that police stations perform such maintenance. No idea how rampant this is, every system will have flaws. But I question whether we can use the alcohol breathalyzer example witho…

If breathalyzers were inaccurate, uncalibrated, or unmaintained it would be trivial to get any conviction relying on their measurements thrown out.

Nothing about the court system is trivial.

Re: Launch HN: SannTek (YC S19) – Breathalyzer for Cannabis

#158
post #145
post #31

I don't understand the negativity in many of the comments here. I'm all for legalization of marijuana, but I actually think that the inability to test for people driving high is a very reasonable argument against legalization. I generally feel that people should be able to make their own choices, but not if those choices involve driving a 3000 pound piece of metal down the highway while impaired. Yes, we need to be c…

> but not if those choices involve driving a 3000 pound piece of metal down the highway while impaired Loads of people make the choice every day to drive while distracted, texting while driving, etc. I see that as a far greater threat that needs to be addressed, and none of those things can be "tested" for when you get pulled over.

I'm not sure I understand your point. There are lots of things that impair driving that can't be tested and are therefore hard to address. Some of them are really bad. Therefore, we should not focus on things that impair driving that can be tested?

Re: Launch HN: SannTek (YC S19) – Breathalyzer for Cannabis

#159
post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

-> Many would say that any level of impaired is not ok Many would also disagree, including the law which in my state allows a BAC of up to .08 to not be charged. In general my opinion is that .08 BAC sounds reasonable and an equivalent of MJ "could" be also. But most cases that would be a huge amount of MJ, and still doesn't relate to the effects noticed at high consumption of alcohol. IE I have never seen someone sm…

Weed is also in other forms like edibles too which are quite potent. I have seen many people who have smoked excessive amounts, or had way too many edibles. I have personally working in the event medical field dealt with countless people who are puking and unconscious due to weed. It definitely is not anywhere near as bad as other drugs impairment wise, but it definitely can be quite dangerous to drive on. And yes, b…

>Weed is also in other forms like edibles too which are quite potent. I have seen many people who have smoked excessive amounts, or had way too many edibles. I have personally working in the event medical field dealt with countless people who are puking and unconscious due to weed.

Every now and then you also hear that a law enforcement officer got high and called 911 panicking, googling "cop calls 911 high" brings up a couple of Canadian officers and a Michigan officer on the first page.

facepalm

If you can let that sort of judgement slip, you think there aren't people out there getting baked and going for a drive, or now that you can easily vape away just driving down the street vaping?

A friend recently passed away and after the funeral a bunch of us went back to the house they grew up in to just hang out and talk about old times. Just about everyone there was getting extremely high, forgetting what they were saying mid sentence, taking the better part of a half hour to scratch off a single scratch off ticket, having the goofy slouch where your head goes way out in front of you... and then leaving, in their vehicles still quite high.

I mean, if you can't have a conversation without completely forgetting what you were saying in the middle of a word... you can't tell me that isn't going to affect your driving. You might just sit at a stop sign for 5 minutes because you forgot it was your turn to go, but you also might be like "hey I'm gonna check Facebook" while you're driving down the interstate.

If I had to choose, I'd rather be on the road with drunk drivers than high drivers. People that are drunk often have slowed reaction time, people that are high can easily entirely forget what they are doing and start doing something else.

Re: Launch HN: SannTek (YC S19) – Breathalyzer for Cannabis

#160
post #87

Are we even sure this is a problem? There seems to be no consensus on the impact of driving on THC [0]. THC has neurocognitive impacts, but those tend to be small and long lasting. It would be strange to tell users they can't drive for 30 days or longer. [0] https://amp.theguardian.com/society/2019/apr/26/driving-whil...

The science is actually pretty concrete regarding the impairing effects of THC. Because cannabis is a schedule 1 drug, it can be very difficult for researchers to get their hands on real world doses of THC. Instead, they use very low doses that are not relevant to what is actually sold at dispensaries. For a really good review of all things cannabis impairment, I would recommend looking through the following report b…

You claim that the science is concrete but cite no actual studies. I’m assuming that this kind of behavior is going to be a good indicator of the product’s actual effectiveness on driving safety overall.
Post reply on HN