UF study finds hand sanitizers could lead to false positives in testing for alcohol

[iluvmycsx]

Germaphobes and barflies have not usually had much in common with each other, until a University of Florida study found that both may test positive for alcohol use.
The study by UF researchers found that the frequent use of hand sanitizers over a period of time can cause a person to test positive for alcohol consumption in some tests, despite the subjects having no history of alcohol use.
In a urine sample, alcohol breakdowns can be found up to five days after consumption, said Dr. Gary Reisfield, assistant professor in the department of psychiatry with the UF College of Medicine and co-author of the study.
Other more commonly used tests, such as a blood sample or a Breathalyzer, can only detect the presence of alcohol up to a few hours after consumption.

 

[LizBot]

No freaking way. That blows!

 

[webby]

I wanted to look into this more, because I know people who use a LOT of hand sanitizer - I'm not trying to argue the above. I just don't want to see people saying... NOOO, I've not been drinking officer,.... I've been just using a lot of hand sanitizer!!!

======
"Can hand sanitizer applied to the skin really affect a breath alcohol test?"

Probably not. A 2006 study among Australian health care workers tested this very question. Twenty workers applied Avangard—a hand sanitizer with 70 percent ethanol (compared with Purell's 62 percent)—30 times during one hour, mimicking the usage in intensive-care units. One to two minutes after the final exposure, six of the workers did show a slight bump in breath-ethanol levels—between 0.001 percent and 0.0025 percent, about the same effect as one-tenth of a beer on an average-size male. Ten to 13 minutes after the final application, however, all the health care workers' breath-ethanol levels had returned to zero.

======