Hic...sorry.
Easy answer: drink at home. In secret.
El Reg tests portable breathalyzers: Getting drunk so you don't have to
Celebrating Christmas and the New Year is traditional in many cultures and, humans being what they are, usually involves the consumption of copious amounts of alcohol. Of course, that consumption comes with a cost. The liver, which processes over 90 per cent of booze consumed, can take a hit from a heavy session. Plenty of …
-
-
-
-
Friday 2nd January 2015 11:19 GMT Dr. Mouse
Re: cheap fun BAC readers too inaccurate
Cheaper might be time release alcohol-filled nanoparticles.
I think the point would be that you actually get drunk at the pub, then activate the nanobots when you need to drive. They sober you up, you drive home, then can release the alcohol and get instantly drunk again.
To be honest, I think taxis are a better idea. Drink what you want, and someone else drives you home. One very good idea, though, would be something you could ingest before you go to bed, which aids in clearing the alcohol from your system somehow. This could be by speeding up the bodies own systems to break it down, or some other method. I have no idea how (or if) this could be done...
-
Wednesday 31st December 2014 20:47 GMT Anonymous Coward
Re: cheap fun BAC readers too inaccurate
Maybe you can just get rid of the whole alcohol consumption middleman, and have nanobots injected into your bloodstream that attack your motor neurons brain centers responsible for inhibitions and judgment :)
(Tough choice between beer and rise of the machines icons on this one)
-
-
-
-
-
Wednesday 31st December 2014 10:44 GMT Buzzword
Re: Social drinking
Yeah, how drunk do you have to be before you want to share your blood alcohol level with the whole world? I can just see Google's advertising networks salivating over this: little AdSense boxes suggesting curry parlours at 11pm and detox clinics the morning after. I'd rather keep my drinking habits out of the hands of big advertisers, thank you very much.
-
-
Wednesday 31st December 2014 07:41 GMT silent_count
For later parts of testing, measured shots of 80 proof Jameson whiskey were used.
Having determined that the Jameson wasn't quite doing the trick, the testers then moved on to shots of Bacardi 151. This produced some quite impressive scores on the breathalyser but still didn't satisfy the hacks in their headlong pursuit of El Reg's standards of journalistic excellence. So out came the Everclear. Sadly, very little can be reported beyond this point except for the 3am declaration that Reg HQ has seceded from mother England, is now an independent republic bereft of public nudity laws, and shall have a navy which consists of an aircraft carrier which launches double decker busses from it's flight deck. All hail emperor DrewC, the first of his name.
In completely unrelated news, The Register is now taking applications for four vacant 'breathalyser tester' positions. Please submit your CVs to the usual suspects.
---
On a more serious note, happy new year to all Reg staff and the commentards who make this site such an enjoyable and educational read.
-
Wednesday 31st December 2014 09:31 GMT Trevor_Pott
Everclear. This is a thing that we can buy here at Vulture North. 95% ethanol. There is a bottle of it in front of me. 750ml. That's 710ish (allowing for some evaporation) ml of ethanol. I have pop in various flavours to mix it with. There are juices.
But there is no rum.
Why is the rum gone? Oh, yes...I drank the rum. LONG LIVE THE NIGHT TIME! THE NIGHT TIME IT A{PPPPOIH8ohewwer--------++++++++CARRIER LOST
-
Wednesday 31st December 2014 11:29 GMT Anonymous Coward
@ Trevor
We seldom agree Trevor but the love of rum transcends everything else.
Invest in a small still (£200), chuck in some brown sugar and molasses and make your own rum. Its deceptively simple and works out at about £3 a litre....
https://onedrive.live.com/redir?resid=7F3877C1DBFB2F81!18531&authkey=!AB7cFBh1oZ2YrV4&v=3&ithint=photo%2cjpg
That's mine...
Of course in Blighty you can only use it to distil water..
(Yeah, whatever Came(mo)ron)
-
-
Tuesday 6th January 2015 15:06 GMT Anonymous Coward
Re: @Cornz - Still
Not quite. Thats the boiler, a 10 gallon stainless steel milk urn with a retro fitted 2k2w Kettle element. That is filled with the fermented sugar and molasses wash and then (very lightly) refluxed in the copper column. The two things protruding from the top are the cooling hose connectors. The outlet pipe has been removed in that picture.
Then boil her up, turn on the water, watch the 70% rum trickle out at about a litre every 15 mins.
* A 10 gallon (10kg dark brown sugar and 5l of molasses) wash will produce a full gallon (UK) of 70% rum or 95% spirit.
Just to do the maths on that. Thats 16 pints of 35% abv bloody good dark rum for about £30.
*apparently as we all know the distilation of alcohol is illegal in the UK because our overlords believe that stills actually produce poisonous alcohol...
-
-
-
-
-
Wednesday 31st December 2014 09:29 GMT Anonymous Coward
UK
I was interested in buying one last year, thinking it would be nice if I could check the next day when I'm safe to go and get my car from the pub. I emailed the police asking for recommendations, thinking I was being incredibly sensible and they would probably have a ready response for saddos like me. They didn't.
I was quite disappointed in the article, I was hoping a few models would be reviewed, but at $99, they are a bit steep ( that's what? 70 of the Queens finest English pounds? )
-
Wednesday 31st December 2014 15:10 GMT Oz
Re: UK
The police probably didn't reply because, in all honesty, these sort of gadgets are not reliable enough to take at face value. Hampshire Police tweeted something to that effect a couple of weeks ago. They have been tweeting a unit chart instead which says how quickly units of each type and size of drink will take to be clear of your system. I know they err on the side of caution but it is pretty scary. As a rule of thumb go for 1 unit per hour and you should be fine
-
Friday 2nd January 2015 11:28 GMT Dr. Mouse
Re: UK
I've always been advised roughly 1 hour per unit consumed after you finish drinking. However, I did come across an (I think) Excel spreadsheet which calculated it all for you, given details about your drinks, timing, and your weight etc. It was very interesting, but I've not been able to find it again.
I would not trust it, though. I would not normally drink heavily if I know I have to drive the next day, and have used a taxi to get to work before now when "a couple" turns into "stumble in at 2am with a kebab".
Assuming you set off for work at 7am and finish drinking around midnight, I would stick to 2-3 pints at most. On 8 pints, finishing at 2am, you shouldn't expect to be fit to drive till the next evening. You may be fine sooner, but I wouldn't count on it.
-
-
Friday 2nd January 2015 13:18 GMT Dr. Mouse
Re: UK
Lol, no I'm not really a doctor. I'd love to get a PhD someday to make it true, but I'm just a lowly BEng.
What I put is just my own opinion, and the guidelines I follow. In my younger days, I took the guidelines on face value and had a pint after work, driving home immediately. I am slim build and, looking back, I was unfit to drive. I would also go on heavy nights out, stopping at a friends house and driving home the next day. On several occasions I was unfit to drive then, too, although I never thought so at the time.
Now I stick to soft drinks when I have to drive, and am careful about how much I drink if I have to drive the next day. I'm just glad that I did no harm back when I wasn't so careful.
-
-
-
-
Wednesday 31st December 2014 09:51 GMT ravenviz
A lot more units out there
The Alcosense Elite available in UK for £60 has a cleaning function where a small fan extracts moisture ready for the next use. They also do more budget models but without this function. Also it does not make judgements about your imminent demise, just whether you are over the limit, or not.
-
-
-
Wednesday 31st December 2014 11:14 GMT Hellcat
Re: So really
By the time you've cleaned up the bathroom and blamed it on the dog. Got a taxi or a lift to the pub. Remembered it was the other pub you drove to, and had to walk there because your lift drove off... Then you should be fine.
That's when you realise you left your car keys in your other coat.
Happy new year.
-
Wednesday 31st December 2014 11:46 GMT Tim99
Re: So really
>>==================> Approximately 2 standard drinks.
OK, I've driven to the pub, drank a gallon of beer and got a taxi home.
What point the next day am I safe to drive? It would be nice if you could buy a cheap unit to give you a vague idea of whether you're legal or not.
A rough answer, assuming that you are sober enough to do the sums: A pint is roughly 2 standard drinks (Old Peculiar is more, boy's bitter is less). So your gallon is roughly 16 standard drinks. A standard drink is roughly equivalent to a 0.03% blood alcohol level if drunk by an average 11 stone man. The same man could metabolize alcohol at roughly 0.018% each hour. So if you drank your gallon over 4 hours you would be very roughly 16x.03 - 4x.018, say 0.4%. This is a level where people can die due to respiratory suppression... Assuming that you get home at midnight, and don't choke in your own vomit overnight, at 8:00am you are still likely to be at five times the 0.05 limit.
In the real world there are a lot more variables. Women have proportionally more fat in their bodies, so their blood volume is generally less (as well as generally having lower levels of the enzyme that metabolizes alcohol). If your weight is 22 stone (and not mostly fat!) you can drink more.
Generally people who drink regularly appear to be less drunk, but when analysed their blood alcohol limits are similar to people who drink less.
-
-
Wednesday 31st December 2014 12:17 GMT Tim99
Re: So really
Generally, you will be OK. Multiply the numbers by roughly 2/3, but you will still be over the legal limit in the morning. In most social drinking you would eat something which will slow everything down. Younger drinkers tend to throw-up at least as much as they keep down. Potentially lethal levels start at ~0.25% - I have personal knowledge of people dying at that level, although usually after inhaling vomit.
I know of one RTA fatality at 0.1% where an elderly woman was struck by a car. The driver was just under the limit, and the suggestion was that the pedestrian was drunk. However witnesses said that she had nursed her usual single pint of Mackeson before walking in front of the car. She only weighed 5 stone.
-
-
-
Saturday 3rd January 2015 09:27 GMT Bilious
Re: So really
A reading of zero is likely to be reliable. Values around the legal limit are risky. You are then betting your driving license on full synchronisation of your instrument with those of the police.
The gadgets to avoid are the ones with falsely low readings and high variability. I suppose package inserts and CE labelling are more reliable than the most recent publication from Vulture Alcotesting Lab.
-
-
-
-
Wednesday 31st December 2014 13:45 GMT Pen-y-gors
Re: Drink and drive, a simple rule:
Weeeell, yes and do....do you mean "Had a drink? Never, ever get behind the wheel of a car ever again?" Seems a bit extreme.
The tricky bit is deciding if you had a drink or six some time ago, when is it safe to drive? Couple of pints at lunchtime - can you drive home after work at 7pm? 4 pints in the pub at night, are you safe in the morning?
What would be really useful is a pocket gadget to answer that question, something that I'd assume these things do. But as the article states
"...keen to stress that the results you get from their devices shouldn't be used to test whether you're safe to drive"
one has to ask what the hell the point of them is?
-
-
Thursday 1st January 2015 16:02 GMT imanidiot
Re: Drink and drive, a simple rule:
The mandatory breath test thingies in france have already proven to be as unreliable (at best) as the tested devices show.
Seriously, anyone who disagrees with me, go seriously test the effects of even small amounts of alcohol on your reaction time, decision making and coordination. You'll find it'll have more effect than you suspect. There is only one rule you should follow, DON'T drink and drive. And if you DO drink, leave PLENTY of time between drinking and then driving.
If you DO drink and drive you are willingly taking the decision to accept the increased risk you will kill someone.
-
Friday 2nd January 2015 07:50 GMT Anonymous Coward
Re: Drink and drive, a simple rule:
As someone who had a friend killed by a drunk driver, I can only agree with you. The words "driving" and "drinking" are incompatible. If you cannot exercise enough self control not to drink when you're driving, you can't sell to me that you're enough in control not to drink more and then still drive.
It's an easy choice: drink OR drive. As soon as the two meet each other, personally, I think you should be done for a minimum of involuntary manslaughter if you hit someone - you made that choice when you got into the car. Oh, and try living with the fact that you killed someone - worse so if you drove others.
The whole alcohol limit is not really there to give you an opportunity to have one, it is there as a tolerance level for substances that may affect the result. Just don't touch alcohol when you're driving, it's pretty much a binary choice.
-
Friday 2nd January 2015 11:42 GMT Dr. Mouse
Re: Drink and drive, a simple rule:
I think you should be done for a minimum of involuntary manslaughter if you hit someone - you made that choice when you got into the car.
I would agree with this, in fact I would go a step further. I think it should be looked at in the same way as "felony murder" in the US: You made the decision to drive drunk, which is a crime. All consequences of that crime should be considered intentional. So if you kill someone, it should be murder. If you crash into another car, it should be treated the same as if you had set out and planned to ram your car into theirs.
It could be taken a stage further than that, even, although I think this one probably goes too far. The fact you have driven drunk means you are accepting the possibility of killing someone, so it could be seen as attempted murder even if you are just pulled over by the cops.
-
Saturday 3rd January 2015 09:38 GMT Bilious
But what is "drinking"?
Non-alcoholic beers may contain up to 0.7 percent alcohol by volume. One unit will not tip you over the legal limit - even a zero litit - because there is a safety margin included in police procedures. But if I drink one such unit at lunch, it affects my alertness a lot more than it would have if I drank that or a larger amount in the evening.
Falling asleep at the wheel: Too risky compared to the pleasure of a (non-alcoholic) beer.
-
This post has been deleted by its author
-
-
-
-
-
Wednesday 31st December 2014 14:09 GMT xyz
Re: Drink and drive, a simple rule:
You're behind the times and your world view is too small. It's compulsory to have one in a car in France (for example). I got the cheapos out of Halfords the other day (£4.99 or something) so if I get pulled going down the A75 I won't get a fine. I'm working on the principle that if I can find them in the glove compartment, I'm fit to drive. ;)
-
-
Wednesday 31st December 2014 11:00 GMT chivo243
Product Placement!
Gotta love the Anchor Steam prominently displayed! I think I remember popping out between classes in Chicago and picking up a few of those for lunch. Those were rosier times when worrying about how many you had wasn't connected with drunk how you are, but saving enough for some post pub grub.
Happy New Year everyone!
Have a pint!
-
Wednesday 31st December 2014 11:22 GMT Anonymous Coward
Scotland
I sure the recently introduced reduced blood alcohol level just in time for the festive season and tonight's Mahogany celebration is as welcome as a turd in a swimming pool.
I'm for a sensible BAC level which caters for some alcohol in the blood the morning after festivities. The people that need to be stopped are those who go out to flagrantly break the law and drive after they are inebriated. Lowering the levels won't have impact on these people's behaviour.
-
Wednesday 31st December 2014 11:32 GMT EddieD
Re: Scotland
To be honest, as a resident, I don't think most folk mind too much - I think though that the French model, where lower levels of BAC are countered with points, a fine and a Road Safety course, rather than a blanket ban would have been preferred, but overall, I don't think folk see it as a problem.
I won't be driving tomorrow :)
-
Wednesday 31st December 2014 12:59 GMT Phil O'Sophical
Re: Scotland
the French model, where lower levels of BAC are countered with points, a fine and a Road Safety course, rather than a blanket ban would have been preferred
Unfortunately that creates a culture where people think it's not a problem to get caught once, only the second time (when you'll get a ban) is "serious", so "one for the road" is still commonplace. It's one reason why the French death toll on the roads is twice the UK one, for the same population numbers.
-
-
-
Wednesday 31st December 2014 12:53 GMT M7S
In the UK
You should be asked the questions "have you had a (n alcoholic) drink in the past 20 minutes or a cigarette (to the best of my recollection) in the past two?". If the answer is yes then a period of time should be allowed to elapse before the roadside test is administered. If you've just left the pub it can be an uncomfortable period of time but it's there for a valid reason. The issue of "mouth alcohol" has long been recognised as distorting results, so this period of time is allowed as it is the concentration in your bloodstream, then exchanged into gas in the lungs, that is the factor regarding impairment. This may also be the procedure in the US (or parts thereof) but I have no knowledge of this.
I'd also echo Dominion's caution against reliance on these devices if they're not regularly re-calibrated. Virtually all medical devices should be, down to the glucometers used in home testing, even the manual sphygmomanometer (spelling that could be a good test for impairment) in a first aid kit can easily go out of kilter.
-
Wednesday 31st December 2014 14:37 GMT Tom 7
Re: In the UK
But the thing is I can down 4 pints in 5 minutes and drive home and get home before my blood stream starts to get illegal amounts of alcohol in it so that would indeed be an uncomfortable wait.
This was tested using police breathalysers but without using a car around the time when they started the countback thing after an argument with a mate - took nearly 30 minutes to get to 80mg.
I wouldn't try it and drive - could barely breathe standing up!
-
-
Wednesday 31st December 2014 13:58 GMT PaulR79
Disclaimer madness!
"both manufacturers were keen to stress that the results you get from their devices shouldn't be used to test whether you're safe to drive."
Oh right. These devices, that have only one purpose for existing, shouldn't be used to judge what they were made for ok? I know they can't replace equipment that costs thousands but come on. Isn't that like having a coffee cup with "hot beverage" marked on it? Oh.. America... gotcha
-
Wednesday 31st December 2014 14:56 GMT Anonymous Coward
RE. Re. In the UK...
I had an idea a while back to use flicker fusion as a dual function BAC and fatigue indicator.
The trick here is to use two different colours on a diffuse RGB LED and release the button when they look the same, repeating the test with alternate colours and getting an average.
Can be calibrated to alarm well before the legal limit and would show fatigue before it became dangerous.
Turns out that driving while tired (cough shift work /cough) is equivalent to a BAC of over the legal breath limit (35mg) but this used to be hard to quantify using a roadside test.
-
-
Thursday 1st January 2015 13:02 GMT Anonymous Coward
Re: I can think of a far better app which asks a few simple questions
1- Normally no, as the station I go home from has a Cornish pasty kiosk.
2- Yes, even when sober, if it's an office party. The organisation I work for is mostly 20-something ladies apart from tech and back-office.
3- No, but I'm happy to have a game anyway.
-
-
Wednesday 31st December 2014 21:49 GMT Anonymous Coward
Unfortunately...
This is a true story.
Chap comes into the Police station, I'm on bar duties. Says he was out last night and wanted to come in to get breathalysed before he drives to his sisters house down south.
Very smart, I say, and I use the intoximeter which registers a fail. I tell him he's over the limit and he asks if he can leave his car in the carpark for a few hours then as he drove to the station to get breathalysed!
*facepalm*
The problem with this stuff is there are too many members of the public relying on these devices prior to getting into their car.
It's not a defence in court and really, if you've got to that stage in life where you simply can't not drink if you know you're driving, you need to have a long chat with yourself.
That's also why Hampshire police wouldn't have recommended a model - they would be putting themselves in the firing line for endorsing a product and also, if it failed and you got caught drunk driving.
Meh.
I'm on Shloer!
-
Thursday 1st January 2015 11:49 GMT Anonymous Coward
To spit or swallow, the age old question.
The moisture affecting the readings/operability of the devices is intriguing.
Would the machine fail to make a reading if a quantity of spit was injected along with the breath ?
How much spit would be required to consistently make breathlysers fail ?
What would be the effects of a particularly viscous grebby ?
Science demands answers.
-
Thursday 1st January 2015 12:29 GMT Muscleguy
Experiment stopped too soon.
The real application of these devices is the morning after. Am I safe to drive after last night's session? When you are drinking it is fairly trivial to work out/remember if you have drunk enough to be illegal to drive. If you don't know that then it past time you worked it out. Most people here in Scotland where the limits have just dropped have done that.
So do it again but give the previously inebriated hacks the devices to take home to see if they are legal to drive to the office (regardless of whether they do so or take some other transport option).
-
Thursday 1st January 2015 12:35 GMT Muscleguy
Additional
Oh and back home in New Zealand they have just done what Scotland has done and lowered the limit. There the police have the power to randomly stop and test you. They set up what are optional road blocks where they wave you over to stop. They found lots of people over the limit the morning after.
Unlike here in Scotland where our parliament has the power to change the limit but not the sanction, in NZ an interim sanction period is in effect for those caught over the new limit but under the old one. You get a fine and points but your license is not suspended. Once the new limits are bedded in this will change.
But be aware if you come up here to Scotland and go on a wee bender. Driving the next morning might not be wise.
-
Thursday 1st January 2015 12:56 GMT Miss Config
Breathalysers in Pubs
As someone who is technically spastic, I walk in such a way that the untrained observer could well
think I'm drunk. There was even a pub once where the barmaid refused me entry as a 'previous' troublemaker. ( I have never been involved in trouble in any pub anywhere ever. )
Obvious solution for any pub where they think I'm drunk is to give me a breathalyser. At least I START OUT sober.
-
Thursday 1st January 2015 23:01 GMT Bob Dole (tm)
About 20 years ago I did training and support for a breathalyzer device we had rolled out across the US. It didn't take long for me to lose count of the number of late night calls asking how to recalibrate them.
That said, one interesting thing did come out of the experience. IF you are moron enough to go driving while under the influence, make sure you have an unopened bottle of something in the trunk. IF you have an accident, take out said bottle and have someone else break the seal, then chug it before the police arrive. They will never be able to prove that the alcohol in your system wasn't from that fresh bottle. You would also have a defense against open container laws.
-
Friday 2nd January 2015 08:35 GMT Dr. Mouse
make sure you have an unopened bottle of something in the trunk
I saw this one on CSI. Sara's dad, I think, was involved in an accident while over the limit, and she told him to find the nearest bar and down some shots. He would be able to say he drank because he was so shaken up, and the cops would not be able to prove he was drunk while driving.
Of course, I certainly do not advocate this. Just don't drink and drive. I, personally, don't have any if I am driving, and drink conservatively if I have to drive the next morning. I would also have no problem reporting someone to the police if I was reasonably sure they had drunk too much and got in a car, even friends or family if I failed to convince them not to (including threatening to report them). Luckily I have very few friends or family who would be stupid enough, and have never had to do this.
-
-
Friday 2nd January 2015 08:53 GMT Anonymous Coward
England and Wales
As a police officer who has in the past 24 hours carried out station procedures (where you blow on the machine costing several thousand pounds) for two drink drivers (the last one was two hours ago, she is still in a cell sobering up), I can safely say that if you drink drive then you're an idiot and you deserve to get caught.
Almost everyone I encounter is so pissed they should have known better. The limit is 35 microgrammes in 100 millilitres of breath in England and Wales. I have no idea what that equates to in American BAC numbers unfortunately but that is not an insignificant amount of alcohol. For most it's more than 'one too many', it's probably three or more alcoholic drinks. NB. if you do not tolerate alcohol well then even one strong alcoholic drink may take you over but for most the above holds true.
Those who we catch routinely blow double or more (both tests were 100 or more). That equates to a very boozy night out. But even those who blow lower stand out like sore thumbs in terms of their driving abilities - they travel too slowly, too quickly, fail to stop for traffic signals, indicate pointlessly, brake pointlessly, cannot keep in lane on any kind of bend and not to mention that even one or two drinks will leave a smell of intoxicants on you for hours. They also have a tendency to panic when a police car pulls behind them.
Here, the police need a reason to breathalyse you (if you have a crash, if you break the traffic law or if the officer suspects you have alcohol on you) but they can stop any car for any reason. This means they can stop you and see if there are grounds to breathalyse you but it's not an automatic right. This is what the police do routinely in the summer and during their Christmas drink drive campaigns and as a result of them, they catch loads of people out. The officers who decide which cars to stop are incredibly good at it and often get results, even on the 'morning after'.
The morning after is tricky but you are all adults. If you're hanging out of your arse, you're unlikely to be fit by any stretch of the imagination but a rule of thumb is one drink (normal beer not double shots etc - call them two drinks) per hour AFTER you've stopped drinking. So if you've had eight bottles of beer and finish drinking at 2AM, go nowhere near a car until at least 10AM. Your mileage will vary significantly depending on what you've drank over what period and on other factors such as stomach contents, build, metabolism, genetics, sleep etc. If you pass out, alcohol in your stomach may continue to be absorbed into your blood after you wake up. My own rule is that I will never drink until after lunch after any kind of night at the pub. If it's anything heavier, I skip driving for the day.
Most are not happy at getting caught drink driving but the fact is if you do it, you've only got yourself to blame and there is very little way out of the charges. The procedure is agreed nationally and has survived hundreds of appeals and loopholes, the machines have been proven reliable and accurate and most officers are incredibly good at following the procedure. Only if you're borderline do you have any hope of getting out of it (blood test being lost, coming back negative etc).
I think it is absolutely right that drink drivers lose their licence for 18 months or more and get fined. It's definitely right that repeat offenders go to prison. Far too many accidents and fatalities occur due to drink drivers.
For reference the police use devices such as those from Drager (costing over £700 each) for roadside tests. In my experience the results tend to be within ±10% of what the station machine reads. The boxes are calibrated monthly and are extremely reliable. I for one would not rely on one of the devices reviewed nor any kind of disposable test! If I had any doubt, I wouldn't drive but if I wanted such a device, there is no way I'd waste £100-200 on one of these, I'd shell out for something Home Office approved.
-
Friday 2nd January 2015 09:14 GMT Chz
Are these certified for use?
I'd love to get something for driving in countries (France being the primary example) where BAC testers are mandatory to carry in the car. But I also know that they need to be certified by the French authorities, and the last time I went into Halfords precisely none of the electronic ones were. Which makes me suspect that a French company makes the disposable, single-use ones.
Biting the hand that feeds IT
