CONTACT US: Contact info
|
Citation |
Verstraete AG, Maes VA. Proc. Int. Counc. Alcohol Drugs Traffic Safety Conf. 2000; 2000. |
|
Copyright |
(Copyright © 2000, The author(s) and the Council, Publisher International Council on Alcohol, Drugs and Traffic Safety) |
|
DOI |
unavailable |
PMID |
unavailable |
|
Abstract |
In response to the Belgian Toxicology and Trauma Study (BTTS), the government decided to enact a new law on driving under the influence of drugs (DUID). A first proposal (forbidding to drive a vehicle if impairing substances are detectable by toxicological analysis, without specific substances nor cut-offs) was considered unconstitutional by the State Council: the list of substances, analytical methods and cut-offs should be specified in the law. A scientific committee was created and a report written on the effects of drugs on driving, drug concentrations in body fluids, and the detection methods. A compromise was found between the scientific recommendations and the political possibilities. A second project of law was then drafted with a three-step process: (a) assessment of external signs of the presence of drugs by a standardized test battery, (b) on-site immunoassay for amphetamines, cannabinoids, cocaine metabolites or opiates in urine, and (c) blood sampling by a physician for GC/MS analysis with the following analytical cutoffs: tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) 2 ng/mL, free morphine 20 ng/mL, amphetamine, MDMA, MDEA, MBDB, benzoylecgonine or cocaine 50 ng/mL. This was discussed in both houses of parliament, with a hearing in the parliamentary commission. The law was adopted unanimously by both houses of parliament, and published in March 1999. |