Abstract
ABSTRACTThe widespread use of hand sanitizers containing high alcohol concentrations (60–95% v/v ethanol) has resulted in a new defence against the charge of drinking and driving. It is commonly known as the Purell® defence, named after a popular hand sanitizer. In this type of defence it is alleged that the blood and breath alcohol concentrations detected in the arrested driver are due to the absorption of alcohol through the skin by frequent use of a hand sanitizer. A reported case of the trial of a United States congressman who used this defence is presented. A literature review of studies on the dermal absorption of alcohol since 1942 was conducted. This review concluded that there was no significant absorption of alcohol through the skin of adults by the use of hand sanitizers and hence would not produce forensically significant elevated breath or blood alcohol concentrations.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
