As some of you are aware, I had an accident a few weeks ago coming down monatacute road in the wet. While in hospital I had blood taken for no other purpose than drug and alcohol testing. I don't mind what sort of lifestyles people have out there, but be careful, even riding a bike you can be tested.
No complaints here. Seems to make way more sense to test people in accidents rather than randomly stopping people for tests.
I reckon I have been tested more times than Lance !
Not saying I am a good rider ,I am saying i am a great crasher and have had many trips to casualty resulting in the usual blood samples being taken !
I never had any of the samples brought to my attention for any PEDs or others ! LOL
Was it definitely going to the police or just data collection ?
police definitely, I got a receipt to say I had given it, and a very official letter saying I was clean. Lucky they didn't find the 200% crazyness.
My brother was in a car accident decades ago. They took blood from the driver and all the passengers - just in case the driver turned out not to be the driver!
I was blood tested after a bicycle-bus incident that occurred mid-morning.
Searched the web but did not find the actual law. The following might be of interest. Also found info that person in control of boat must not be over 0.05 BAC. That drivers of public buses and trains [and trams?] must have zero BAC.
Drink Driving is one of the main causes of road deaths in South Australia . . . Drinking alcohol affects driving skills and increases the likelihood that the driver will engage in risk-taking behaviour . . . While most of the attention is focused on people who drink and drive, cyclists and pedestrians affected by alcohol also risk being killed or injured on our roads. Alcohol has been identified as a significant risk factor in collisions involving a pedestrian with 36% of pedestrian fatalities found to have a blood alcohol concentration above the legal driving limit of 0.05.
It is against the law for learner/probationary drivers to drive with any alcohol in their body as it is a breach of their learner/probationary conditions. Drink driving provisions also apply to someone acting as a qualified passenger for a learner driver. A qualified passenger is a person who occupies a seat next to a learner driver and is the holder of a driver's licence for that type of vehicle. They can be required to undergo a breath analysis or provide a blood sample in the same way as if they were actually driving the vehicle.
Drunk driving countermeasures have included the 0.05 g% legal limit and mandatory disqualification, random breath testing, compulsory blood alcohol tests on all road crash casualties and a zero blood alcohol limit for learner and probationary drivers and motor cyclists.
Essentially we are now “encouraged” (or “required” to if there is a fatality involved) to blood test ALL patients from a motor vehicle accident who present to ED (or brought to the ED by police who suspect they were driving whilst drug affected), if they are aged 15 years or over irrespective of whether they were driving or not, and irrespective of whether a alcohol breathe test is negative or not.
'motor vehicle', and 'disqualification', seem at odds with cycling accidents!
You make a fair point here David.
Is all very well for the State to insist on people having this test or that, which for most people is minor.
But for some people, these tests are unpleasant or painful t. For a few, the medicos botch the procedure, and leave people in pain. For occasional others, the medicos go by the book - but people have side effects (e.g fainting) that are not trivial (I myself tend to go a bit the latter).
So the test - though minor - can have real risks attached.
That's why, whenever the State compels people to undergo medical tests they would not normally undergo - compels by law - we need to watch the State very very carefully indeed.