Drunk driving is again in the news both nationally and here in Boston. Last Friday Guy Patierno, 62, was arrested and charged with driving under the influence (DUI) for the 12th time. In a Salem News editorial the question is raised: “Why wasn’t he in jail?” His license was revoked for life in 2010 and his behavior in this and previous incidents is noted as dangerous to the general public. A recent Boston Herald investigation notes that there are more than 1,000 drivers in Massachusetts with five or more DUI convictions who are still in possession of valid licenses.

Police say a Salem man with a suspended license and a vehicle with a suspended registration was arrested on his third drunken driving charge after a traffic stop the morning of May 7. Russel McGlone, 53, was arrested on charges of drunken driving, third offense; operating a motor vehicle with a suspended license, subsequent offense; and operating a motor vehicle with a suspended registration, subsequent offense.

Police report a motorist was hospitalized and then arrested on a charge of drunken driving in the early morning of May 10 after she crashed into a building on Washington Square North and then reversed into a fence on Salem Common. Kathryn Rose Maloney, 20, of Salem, was arrested on a charge of drunken driving after she was transported to North Shore Medical Center.

A Beverly man who was found passed out at the wheel of his car in the right lane of Route 128 south early on May 10 and is being held without bail on what prosecutors say is at least his fourth drunken-driving charge. Brian Sadler, 37, pleaded not guilty to a charge of drunken driving during his arraignment in Salem District Court, where Judge Matthew Machera, after a brief hearing, concluded that Sadler posed too great a danger to the public to release under any conditions.

In other news, the National Transportation Safety Board is requesting that state legislatures lower the blood alcohol level standard for DUI from .08 to .05. Dramatic progress was made in the 1980s through the mid-1990s after the minimum drinking age was raised to 21 and the legally-allowable maximum level of drivers’ blood alcohol content was lowered to .08. Currently, drunken driving in America claims nearly 10,000 lives a year, down from 21,000 in 1982. Advocates for lowering the legal limit cite these statistics as well as the physical effects of a BAC of .05.

Effects of physical functioning at different BAC levels
02%
Some loss of judgment
Relaxation
Slight body warmth
Altered mood
Decline in visual functions (rapid tracking of a moving target)
Decline in ability to perform two tasks at the same time (divided attention)

.05%
Exaggerated behavior
May have loss of small-muscle control (e.g., focusing your eyes)
Impaired judgment
Usually good feeling
Lowered alertness
Release of inhibition
Reduced coordination
Reduced ability to track moving objects
Difficulty steering
Reduced response to emergency driving situations

In 2011, 36% of motor vehicle related fatalities were alcohol related. In Massachusetts, for the same time period, the figure was 45%. In Massachusetts, in 29011, 32% of alcohol related motor vehicle fatalities had BAC of .08 or above equal to the national average.

At what point is a determination made that public safety must be protected and that a person’s alcoholism is too out of control to allow them to remain unsuccessfully treated in the community? For people who are unable to reach sobriety in the community sometimes incarceration is the only way they will be able to reach this goal.

Last July Bradford Billings Smith of Salem ran his 26 foot motor boat aground on Lobster Rock in Salem Harbor. Authorities had been notified earlier due to Smith’s reckless piloting of his boat, careening around the harbor and sideswiping a sailboat. When confronted by the Harbor Master, his assistant and an Environmental Police officer, it appeared Smith was drunk and he was removed from the boat. Smith admitted to having “two big” drinks prior to his unexpected meeting with the authorities.

Smith’s trial has begun and he is claiming that there was no cause to remove him from his boat and that he was protesting this action as he was concerned about leaving his expensive boat behind in the harbor. Authorities claim they took action due to their concern about the safety of Mr. Smith and other boaters in the harbor.

Piloting a boat is tricky. Unlike a car on a road, the surface on which you are traveling can be unpredictable. Waves, currents, logs and other floating objects can all interfere with your safety. The movement of other boats can be unpredictable as there are not clearly defined streets and lane markers as found when driving a car. Adding alcohol to the equation is by all counts, very dangerous.

Alcohol is the leading contributing factor in fatal boating accidents involving the USA’s 12.4 million registered boats, the U.S. Coast Guard says. There were 126 fatalities and 293 injuries in 330 alcohol-related boating accidents in the USA in 2010.

Smith, 43 has two previous drunk driving convictions on his record. Smith had lost his driver’s license in 2004 for 10 years and last summer had the license returned to him. It is unclear why this occurred well in advance of the 10 year period. Mr. Smith has been charged with driving under the influence a number of other times as well in both Massachusetts and New Hampshire. He has also been held without bail since last month after testing positive on a home alcohol monitor that was a requirement of his probation from his previous conviction. The boat charges include a minimum mandatory 150 days in jail if convicted.

With this type of pattern, it appears Mr. Smith has a serious problem with alcohol and needs treatment. Hopefully the restrictions and structure of the legal system will provide him with the necessary motivation to engage in treatment.

Last July Bradford Billings Smith of Salem ran his 26 foot motor boat aground on Lobster Rock in Salem Harbor. Authorities had been notified earlier due to Smith’s reckless piloting of his boat, careening around the harbor and sideswiping a sailboat. When confronted by the Harbor Master, his assistant and an Environmental Police officer, it appeared Smith was drunk and he was removed from the boat. Smith admitted to having “two big” drinks prior to his unexpected meeting with the authorities.

Smith’s trial has begun and he is claiming that there was no cause to remove him from his boat and that he was protesting this action as he was concerned about leaving his expensive boat behind in the harbor. Authorities claim they took action due to their concern about the safety of Mr. Smith and other boaters in the harbor.

Piloting a boat is tricky. Unlike a car on a road, the surface on which you are traveling can be unpredictable. Waves, currents, logs and other floating objects can all interfere with your safety. The movement of other boats can be unpredictable as there are not clearly defined streets and lane markers as found when driving a car. Adding alcohol to the equation is by all counts, very dangerous.

Alcohol is the leading contributing factor in fatal boating accidents involving the USA’s 12.4 million registered boats, the U.S. Coast Guard says. There were 126 fatalities and 293 injuries in 330 alcohol-related boating accidents in the USA in 2010.

Smith, 43 has two previous drunk driving convictions on his record. Smith had lost his driver’s license in 2004 for 10 years and last summer had the license returned to him. It is unclear why this occurred well in advance of the 10 year period. Mr. Smith has been charged with driving under the influence a number of other times as well in both Massachusetts and New Hampshire. He has also been held without bail since last month after testing positive on a home alcohol monitor that was a requirement of his probation from his previous conviction. The boat charges include a minimum mandatory 150 days in jail if convicted.

With this type of pattern, it appears Mr. Smith has a serious problem with alcohol and needs treatment. Hopefully the restrictions and structure of the legal system will provide him with the necessary motivation to engage in treatment.

If you have ever driven in Boston it is understandable if you assume all drivers are drunk. However, a Boston Globe article on Monday illuminates the issue by highlighting the low number of drunk driving arrests in this city.

For some reason, Boston has the lowest number of arrests, per capita of any major Northeast city. The arrest rate in Philadelphia is 20 times higher than Boston for drunk driving. Boston is on record as having made 241 arrests for drunk driving last year. In the same time period, Denver a smaller city, recorded 3000 arrests for the same crime. Boston officials attempt to explain the disparity by citing Boston’s “walkability” and that many of the major roadways are patrolled by State and not city police. Other sources state that drunk driving violations are not a priority for Boston police and that Massachusetts State Police arrests for drunk driving have increased dramatically over the past year.

The laws on drunk driving are pretty clear. If your blood alcohol level is above .08, you are automatically guilty of driving under the influence (per se law) . If you are under 21 the legal limit is .02. If your blood alcohol level is .05 or above you may be charged with DUI but other evidence is necessary for a conviction. Blood alcohol levels may be determined through a Breathalyzer test or a blood test. The field sobriety test, usually administered by a police officer who has stopped you includes other tests used to determine if someone is driving under the influence. These usually include tests of eye hand coordination such as walking a straight line, heel to toe; tilt your head back, stretch out your arms and touch your nose first with one hand, then the other; recite the alphabet backwards and/or recite the alphabet forwards without singing. Some of these may sound silly but they all test for degrees of brain functioning impairment that occur at different blood alcohol levels.

It is actually pretty difficult to get arrested for drunk driving anywhere in the United States. Generally industry figures show that on average, a person drives 80 times under the influence before being pulled over. The drunk driving laws are an attempt to improve public safety, despite complaints by some that it is a violation of their civil liberties. Drunk driving is still a major problem in this country, accounting for nearly one-third (31%) of all traffic-related deaths in the United States. Since 1980 when the laws were tightened up throughout the country and the legal limited lowered from .10 to .08, drunk driving deaths decreased 50%. Between 2007 and 2011 drunk driving fatalities have fallen 25% in the Commonwealth.

Maybe with a little more diligence from the City of Boston, these numbers could be reduced further.

If you have ever driven in Boston it is understandable if you assume all drivers are drunk. However, a Boston Globe article on Monday illuminates the issue by highlighting the low number of drunk driving arrests in this city.

For some reason, Boston has the lowest number of arrests, per capita of any major Northeast city. The arrest rate in Philadelphia is 20 times higher than Boston for drunk driving. Boston is on record as having made 241 arrests for drunk driving last year. In the same time period, Denver a smaller city, recorded 3000 arrests for the same crime. Boston officials attempt to explain the disparity by citing Boston’s “walkability” and that many of the major roadways are patrolled by State and not city police. Other sources state that drunk driving violations are not a priority for Boston police and that Massachusetts State Police arrests for drunk driving have increased dramatically over the past year.

The laws on drunk driving are pretty clear. If your blood alcohol level is above .08, you are automatically guilty of driving under the influence (per se law) . If you are under 21 the legal limit is .02. If your blood alcohol level is .05 or above you may be charged with DUI but other evidence is necessary for a conviction. Blood alcohol levels may be determined through a Breathalyzer test or a blood test. The field sobriety test, usually administered by a police officer who has stopped you includes other tests used to determine if someone is driving under the influence. These usually include tests of eye hand coordination such as walking a straight line, heel to toe; tilt your head back, stretch out your arms and touch your nose first with one hand, then the other; recite the alphabet backwards and/or recite the alphabet forwards without singing. Some of these may sound silly but they all test for degrees of brain functioning impairment that occur at different blood alcohol levels.

It is actually pretty difficult to get arrested for drunk driving anywhere in the United States. Generally industry figures show that on average, a person drives 80 times under the influence before being pulled over. The drunk driving laws are an attempt to improve public safety, despite complaints by some that it is a violation of their civil liberties. Drunk driving is still a major problem in this country, accounting for nearly one-third (31%) of all traffic-related deaths in the United States. Since 1980 when the laws were tightened up throughout the country and the legal limited lowered from .10 to .08, drunk driving deaths decreased 50%. Between 2007 and 2011 drunk driving fatalities have fallen 25% in the Commonwealth.

Maybe with a little more diligence from the City of Boston, these numbers could be reduced further.

Local municipalities are still scrambling to adjust to the Commonwealth’s new medical marijuana law that was passed by the voters last November. The law, scheduled to be implemented by May 1 has numerous loopholes and vague language that has left many city and town officials questioning how to implement this program. One of the questions that remains to be answered is how much marijuana constitutes a “60 day supply” (as allowable in the new law).

The State Department of Public Health (DPH), responsible for oversight of the law’s implementation, plans to offer final rules by May 24, supposedly to provide definitive interpretation of the law and close the loopholes. In the absence of this guidance, towns are taking matters into their own hands. Wakefield, Burlington, Melrose, Peabody and Reading have all enacted bans on the opening of any marijuana dispensaries within their city limits for up to 17 months.

State Attorney General Martha Coakley struck down Wakefield’s moratorium on March 19, stating that it was in violation of the state law. This now raises the question of whether the other towns’ moratoriums will be upheld or struck down as well. Wakefield town leaders plan to appeal this decision.

On Friday the DPH released a draft of these eagerly awaited regulations and clearly stated that no marijuana dispensaries will be allowed to open until the final regulations are in place. This will, in all likelihood delay implementation of the program as there are already many strong arguments and questions from both sides.

The actions against implementation of the medical marijuana law appear to be efforts to keep the drug out of the hands of “unauthorized people”. Considerable information exists from implementation of similar laws in other states that show that the laws have been used as de facto legalization of marijuana programs, rather than pain management programs, as they have been positioned.

Local municipalities are still scrambling to adjust to the Commonwealth’s new medical marijuana law that was passed by the voters last November. The law, scheduled to be implemented by May 1 has numerous loopholes and vague language that has left many city and town officials questioning how to implement this program. One of the questions that remains to be answered is how much marijuana constitutes a “60 day supply” (as allowable in the new law).

The State Department of Public Health (DPH), responsible for oversight of the law’s implementation, plans to offer final rules by May 24, supposedly to provide definitive interpretation of the law and close the loopholes. In the absence of this guidance, towns are taking matters into their own hands. Wakefield, Burlington, Melrose, Peabody and Reading have all enacted bans on the opening of any marijuana dispensaries within their city limits for up to 17 months.

State Attorney General Martha Coakley struck down Wakefield’s moratorium on March 19, stating that it was in violation of the state law. This now raises the question of whether the other towns’ moratoriums will be upheld or struck down as well. Wakefield town leaders plan to appeal this decision.

On Friday the DPH released a draft of these eagerly awaited regulations and clearly stated that no marijuana dispensaries will be allowed to open until the final regulations are in place. This will, in all likelihood delay implementation of the program as there are already many strong arguments and questions from both sides.

The actions against implementation of the medical marijuana law appear to be efforts to keep the drug out of the hands of “unauthorized people”. Considerable information exists from implementation of similar laws in other states that show that the laws have been used as de facto legalization of marijuana programs, rather than pain management programs, as they have been positioned.

Lance Armstrong was acknowledged as the pre-eminent bicycle racer in the world. He had won the Tour de France 7 times in a row and his personal story as a cancer survivor and founder of the Livestrong Foundation captivated us all. However, this all crashed when he finally admitted on national television that he had accomplished his athletic feats through the use of performance enhancing drugs.

The specific drugs he used included what are referred to as “blood boosters”. The most widely used of this type of drug in the bicycle racing community is EPO. EPO, or erythropoietin, is a hormone naturally produced by human kidneys to stimulate red blood cell production, according to the World Anti-Doping Agency. This can improve recovery and endurance, vital to professional bicycle racers who are riding over 100 miles a day, day after day. Some of the risks that may result from the thickening of the blood that occurs through EPO use are: an increased risk of several deadly diseases, such as heart disease, stroke, and cerebral or pulmonary embolism.

Another way to achieve a similar effect is through blood transfusions. Athletes store amounts of their own blood drawn before the season starts, when they are well rested. They then infuse this fresh blood back into their system later in the season when they need a boost. This performance enhancement is undetectable to drug tests as it uses the athlete’s own blood. Is this cheating? Does this make it an illegal performance enhancement? What about taking vitamins? What happens when virtually all the competitors in a sport, like bicycle racing admit to using illegal performance enhancing drugs? Should this be allowed because this creates a “level playing field”?

Elite level athletes are always looking for the next big thing to give them the professional edge over their competitors. Where do we draw the line between natural means and cheating?

Lance Armstrong was acknowledged as the pre-eminent bicycle racer in the world. He had won the Tour de France 7 times in a row and his personal story as a cancer survivor and founder of the Livestrong Foundation captivated us all. However, this all crashed when he finally admitted on national television that he had accomplished his athletic feats through the use of performance enhancing drugs.

The specific drugs he used included what are referred to as “blood boosters”. The most widely used of this type of drug in the bicycle racing community is EPO. EPO, or erythropoietin, is a hormone naturally produced by human kidneys to stimulate red blood cell production, according to the World Anti-Doping Agency. This can improve recovery and endurance, vital to professional bicycle racers who are riding over 100 miles a day, day after day. Some of the risks that may result from the thickening of the blood that occurs through EPO use are: an increased risk of several deadly diseases, such as heart disease, stroke, and cerebral or pulmonary embolism.

Another way to achieve a similar effect is through blood transfusions. Athletes store amounts of their own blood drawn before the season starts, when they are well rested. They then infuse this fresh blood back into their system later in the season when they need a boost. This performance enhancement is undetectable to drug tests as it uses the athlete’s own blood. Is this cheating? Does this make it an illegal performance enhancement? What about taking vitamins? What happens when virtually all the competitors in a sport, like bicycle racing admit to using illegal performance enhancing drugs? Should this be allowed because this creates a “level playing field”?

Elite level athletes are always looking for the next big thing to give them the professional edge over their competitors. Where do we draw the line between natural means and cheating?

The administrators at Partners-Faulkner Hospital have responded to intense community feedback and announced their decision to keep open the specialized addictions treatment unit at the Jamaica Plain hospital. Ed Liston-Kraft, vice president of professional and clinical services stated that instead of closing the 15 bed unit as originally planned, the Faulkner will maintain 9 beds on this unit.

The new plan is partially a result of pressure from the state’s Department of Public Health which requested a detailed plan and justification for the closure of the unit which Dr. Madeleine Biondolillo, director of DPH’s Division of Health Care Quality noted was “necessary for preserving access and health status” in the hospital’s service area.

Additional pressure was brought to Faulkner by former Massachusetts First Lady Kitty Dukakis, who has publicly discussed her battles with addiction and depression and related that a relative was treated there in the past with successful results.

The original plan called for the closure of the dedicated 15 bed detox unit and the maintenance of 6 beds in other units for these clients. The Faulkner unit has been noted as one of only two in the state as possessing the capacity to serve addicted adults with co-occurring medical compli- cations, a highly at risk population. For the entire state, there are only 140 of these beds, including the 15 currently at Faulkner.

Alcoholics and those addicted to other drugs regularly experience serious medical problems as they age, due to their substance use. Diabetes and heart disease is well documented in alcoholics and often begins to have major effects on the addict as young as their forties. IV drug users are usually struggling with Hepatitis C, a liver disease that is a direct result of sharing needles with other drug users.

The administrators at Partners-Faulkner Hospital have responded to intense community feedback and announced their decision to keep open the specialized addictions treatment unit at the Jamaica Plain hospital. Ed Liston-Kraft, vice president of professional and clinical services stated that instead of closing the 15 bed unit as originally planned, the Faulkner will maintain 9 beds on this unit.

The new plan is partially a result of pressure from the state’s Department of Public Health which requested a detailed plan and justification for the closure of the unit which Dr. Madeleine Biondolillo, director of DPH’s Division of Health Care Quality noted was “necessary for preserving access and health status” in the hospital’s service area.

Additional pressure was brought to Faulkner by former Massachusetts First Lady Kitty Dukakis, who has publicly discussed her battles with addiction and depression and related that a relative was treated there in the past with successful results.

The original plan called for the closure of the dedicated 15 bed detox unit and the maintenance of 6 beds in other units for these clients. The Faulkner unit has been noted as one of only two in the state as possessing the capacity to serve addicted adults with co-occurring medical compli- cations, a highly at risk population. For the entire state, there are only 140 of these beds, including the 15 currently at Faulkner.

Alcoholics and those addicted to other drugs regularly experience serious medical problems as they age, due to their substance use. Diabetes and heart disease is well documented in alcoholics and often begins to have major effects on the addict as young as their forties. IV drug users are usually struggling with Hepatitis C, a liver disease that is a direct result of sharing needles with other drug users.