Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

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

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

401–410 of 421 posts

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

#401

Post by thatcat »

SannTek wrote: post #369
thatcat wrote: post #334

Shouldn't you need to prove that cannabis inhibits your driving first?

There is actually a lot of peer reviewed articles supporting the fact that cannabis impairs driving. Here are a few articles you might be interested in. Ramaekers JG, Van Wel JH, Spronk DB, et al. Cannabis and tolerance: Acute drug impairment as a function of cannabis use history. Sci Rep. 2016;6(May):1-9. doi:10.1038/srep26843 ( https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4881034/ ) Veldstra JL, Bosker WM, De Waard…

Why would pro level gran turismo driving simulator gamers use it as a performance enhancing drug if it "inhibits driving ability"?

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

#402

Post by jjulius »

SannTek wrote: post #285
neuralzen wrote: post #282

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I admire what you're doing, and hope you can adhere to scientific integrity while developing and selling your product, but that simply isn't true. At least in Washington state. A few years ago Washington State purchased a whole bunch of Draeger 9510 (alcohol breathalyzer) units without ever having tested them. After two years of sitting unused, the warranties were going to expire and they finally got around to testin…

Thanks for the info. Definitely something we have not run into or considered yet. I guess we just naively assumed that all police precincts were as scrupulous as those we talked to :(. There is some stuff we can do, however. For instance, we can directly build the QC schedule into the device so it does not work unless you get it calibrated. We can also have QC cartridges that have a barcode that the device reads to m…

>I guess we just naively assumed that all police precincts were as scrupulous as those we talked to :(.

Bless your heart.

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

#403

Post by jjulius »

01100011 wrote: post #272
cmrdporcupine wrote: post #15

So many naysayers here, many of which probably aren't sharing the road with cannabis consuming drivers in a region where it is 100% legal like here in Canada. I've consumed it many times, and I know how impaired I'd be behind the wheel. It terrifies me to think of all the idiots who are probably out there driving while stoned, pretending they're "perfectly fine." EDIT: cool, these guys are around the corner from wher…

I was an all-day pothead for 16 years with hundreds of thousands of miles behind the wheel. I had zero at-fault accidents and 2 speeding tickets during that time. I find it hard to support regulating something like THC or other metabolite threshold testing because I feel like it completely ignores the overall relationship to impairment. Driving with an anger management issue is a much more serious problem in my exper…

I foolishly drove drunk home from shows, clubs and restaurants for about five years, and I mean drunk. Never had an accident, never got pulled over. I'm sober now and completely regret that and realize how dangerous it was. Just because you and I were capable of getting home safely does NOT mean that everyone else is. You cannot use anecdotal experiences to support this kind of argument.

Edit: I'm also an all-day pothead (yeah, I've obviously got my vices...) and I don't trust everyone to be able to react quickly or remain focused or not get paranoid when they're stoned and driving.

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

#404

Post by lowdose »

SannTek wrote: post #255
woah wrote: post #4

Sounds like it’s well-intentioned, but I’m afraid that given the incentives of all parties involved here, and the complexity of the technology, there will be a lot of false positives. It’s obvious that the police will want a device that produces more convictions, no point in disputing that. I’m wondering if you can elaborate on what incentives your company has to produce accurate devices, against your customer’s unst…

You raise a good point. Interestingly, your comments run contrary to what a lot of law enforcement officers have said to us. In general, the police are hyper vigilant about buying only devices that are independently validated to be very accurate. Every conversation we have had has eventually lead to "is it NHTSA approved?". The reason for this need for third party validation is that the police are incredibly court ro…

Like the lie detector?

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

#405

Post by beatgammit »

egdod wrote: post #264
deckar01 wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Lots of behaviors impair your driving ability. A study found that being dehydrated caused the same number of driving errors as being drunk [0]. I'm sure it would be easy to make a field sobriety test for blood water content, but they don't, because safety isn't the real reason these laws get made. It's just public pressure to enforce moral values. [0]: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/health/news/11547199/Not-dr...

> safety isn't the real reason these laws get made. It's just public pressure to enforce moral values Oh please. Alcohol accounts for 30ish percent of driving fatalities. Even if dehydration is equally dangerous (a big if) it’s still far less prevalent. Maybe that’s the reason there’s no law about it.

There are other things that lead to driving accidents, like lack of sleep or perhaps even needing to use the restroom. Ideally, a field test would cover most of these.

Someone just over the legal alcohol limit could be less impaired than a drowsy, sober driver, but the former would be more likely to be blamed for an accident than the latter, especially in areas with really low limits (e.g. it's 0.05% here in Utah).

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

#406

Post by SannTek »

jowday wrote: post #368

Dumb question - does the way the cannabis was consumed affect the accuracy of the device? Does it work as well for edible cannabis as it does for a joint?

Great question actually.

The device works well for vaped and smoked cannabis. We generally see peak concentration 10 minutes after smoking, and a steady decay to 0 over the next few hours.

We are in the midst of testing for edibles. What we would expect is that the concentration is lower and that peak concentration should occur 1-2 hours post consumption, followed by decay. We will see how it goes!

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

#407

Post by NikkiA »

michaelmrose wrote: post #348
ehnto wrote: post #201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is why many states follow a positive breathalyzer test with a blood test. In my state, you can refuse them both, but you lose your license temporarily for doing so. I think that's fair. I understand some are skeptical about giving blood to the police, but if you can't prove you're not drunk or high after a positive reading on a less accurate device, then you aren't allowed on the road. The risk is too great for…

If the device is wildly inaccurate why would you be obliged to prove your innocence barring other evidence of impairment.

You're usually free to refuse the blood test, but the DMV is also free to revoke your license arbitarily.

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

#408

Post by michaelmrose »

sjy wrote: post #385
michaelmrose wrote: post #347

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a problem if it measures use instead of impairment especially where use is legal even more so if use is medical. You'd find it pretty stupid if a breathalyzer sunk your life where you had a beer yesterday or 2 oz of beer 30 minutes ago.

Some of the Australian jurisdictions in which mobile drug testing has been implemented don't see this as a problem: as well as driving while impaired, there is a separate offence for having illicit drugs in your system which is designed for cases where the user may not actually be impaired [1] [2]. [1]: https://www.legalaid.nsw.gov.au/publications/factsheets-and-... [2]: https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-05-06/nsw-ann…

You don't see an issue with this? The people have an obvious vested interest in ensuring people aren't driving impaired. This is why we effectively are able to justify effectively searching your body for things that we have justifiable reason to believe may exist and might cause you to accidentally murder your fellow citizen with your car.

Absent the motive of impairment how do we justify such a search when we wouldn't allow such a thing in your house or on the sidewalk? Presumably Australia does because its notions of civil rights are about as interesting as Alabama's notion of reproductive freedom but do you?

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

#409

Post by michaelmrose »

lsc wrote: post #391
rxhernandez wrote: post #243

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's utterly disgusting that the state can invade your body and take blood out with a warrant.

I personally think it's utterly disgusting that people are allowed to operate what are essentially giant weapons in public with extremely minimal testing or training, and with minimal limits on alcohol usage. I think it's totally reasonable to ask people to give up some of the rights they'd normally have, when those people want to operate heavy machinery in public. My understanding is that GA pilots are not allowed t…

It takes between 1 - 3 hours for a single mixed drink or pint of beer to be metabolized.

As a starting point I think you will agree that someone who has a BAC of zero ought to be able to drive.

The majority of drunk driving accidents are the result of people that are plowed. More disturbing by far those who ARE caught and jailed have driven hundreds of thousands of miles drunk as a skunk before actually getting taken off the road.

As BAC decreases accident rates decline towards normalcy at around 0.06 its difficult to distinguish the accident rate of those who have consumed and those who have not.

People at that point neither walk nor drive funny and are very unlikely to be discovered unless you stop and test everyone or you happen to be black or Hispanic.

Instead of tightening already reasonable standards to ridiculous levels we would save vastly more lives by actually enforcing the laws we have effectively.

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

#410

Post by [deleted] »

rlt wrote: post #137
chadash wrote: 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?

[deleted]
Post reply on HN