there’s a chart on this dmv page that shows you have to be 240lbs to get .02 per drink
https://www.dmv.ca.gov/portal/handbook/california-driver-han...
https://www.businessinsider.com/drinks-before-driving-if-bac... has me at 0.13 after 5 drinks versus 0.21 according to the CA chart. This is an astromical difference that I implies at least one source is lying via statistics.
The article you linked contains charts from the Texas ABC which do not indicate what percentile they measure. The original source [1] is a dead link but it's still available in the Wayback machine [2], where the PDF states "Note: The figures are averages and may vary based on the amount of food in your stomach."
The difference in these charts in no way "implies that at least one source is lying via statistics", just that you are attempting to compare different statistics dealing with something that's going to be quite variable from individual to individual. IMO, the 95th percentile is a better approach, if your intention is to give people a rough intuition for how much might be too much.
[1] http://www.tabc.state.tx.us/publications/brochures/BACCharts...
[2] https://web.archive.org/web/20190903232034/http://www.tabc.s...
After having a "typical" longneck-format beer I'd be at 0.04 and already in the "unsafe to drive" threshold. This is not bragging by the way, don't drink and drive, but we should have a discussion over values that actually make sense.
0.11 is very definitely impaired, whether or not you “feel” anything.
False feelings of sobriety are common in heavy drinkers (and users of some drugs with similar mechanisms of action)
Please don’t drink anywhere near this amount and drive, no matter how sober you might feel.
I think it's more of a question about risk tolerance than alcohol tolerance
> In the UK, driving or attempting to drive whilst above the legal limit of 0.08% BAC in England, Wales and Northern Ireland, and 0.05% BAC in Scotland or unfit through drink carries a maximum penalty of six months' imprisonment, a fine of up to £5,000 and a minimum twelve months' disqualification.
Not that anecdotes are data, just to say it 100% depends on the person and the circumstances. Alcohol hits me much harder now.
0.14 was the scientifically determined level of impairment. 0.08 is the number MADD paid for.
In unrelated news, driving deaths per inhabitant or per km are also substantially lower in Europe (2x, 5x, etc, depends on country and metric - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_traffic-r...). Not only due to blood alcohol limits of course, but those changes are symptomatic of an effort to change the rules to actually affect road accident deaths.
The legal limit used to be 0.14, until neoprohibitionists captured our politicians and pushed for the non-scientific 0.08
I'm not convinced of the values in that table. I think they are being very conservative. My calculations using a BAC formula are different. For example, the .02 per drink seems to work for men weighing 215lbs.
There's a lot of beer these days that's >5% alcohol, so a single beer often has more than one drink.
RIP, you were taken from us too soon.
It's actually "only" 9%. (https://northcoastbrewing.com/beers/year-round-beers/old-ras...)
If you want a high-alcohol beer, consider a draught of Tactical Nuclear Penguin at a bracing 32% ABV (https://blog.brewdog.com/usa/blog/the-worlds-strongest-beer-...)
Higher levels of alcohol can disguise bad or cheap processes. For example, these days red wines are often 14% - 14.5% alcohol or even higher and these percentages are pretty universal irrespective of which region of the world they come from. In decades past the equivalent wines would have been only 12% - 12.5%. (Remember, top first growth Bordeaux reds were traditionally 12.5% - it's the extra ageing that makes them great (at least in part) - not the extra alcohol.)
The spirity character of additional alcohol adds extra zest to a poorly made wine. For instance, a few extra percent alcohol can make up for the much shorter maturity (cask) times that makers allow for wines these days. If anything, we need research to make wines, beers etc. of comparable or even better quality but with even lower alcohol, but there seems precious little interest in that.
In essence, money again trumps health considerations.
No, I'm not a wowser, I've an empty one liter bottle of 56% proof cask-stength single malt Bowmore scotch sitting on a shelf to remind me how nice it was. But that's not the point!