Breathometer settles dispute with FTC regarding 'deceptive' advertising

Shawn Knight

Posts: 15,256   +192
Staff member

The Federal Trade Commission has reached a settlement with Breathometer Inc., makers of the portable Breathometer that found success on both Indiegogo and Shark Tank, regarding the product’s ability to accurately measure users’ blood alcohol content (BAC).

As per the settlement, the FTC has barred Breathometer and its founder and CEO Charles Michael Yim from making future accuracy claims for a consumer breathalyzer product unless its claims are backed up by rigorous testing.

The company also agreed to notify everyone that purchased a Breathometer product and offer a full refund. According to the complaint, sales of the company’s two devices – the Breathometer Original and Breathometer Breeze – totaled $5.1 million.

The original Breathometer was designed to plug into your smartphone’s headphone jack while the Breeze connected wirelessly via Bluetooth. Both devices were touted as being able to accurately measure the blood-alcohol concentration of a user to help them determine if they were fit to drive.

Ads for both products said their accuracy was proven by government-lab grade testing yet the FTC contends that neither device was adequately tested for accuracy. What’s more, the FTC alleged that Breathometer was aware that the Breeze regularly understated BAC levels but failed to notify users and continued to run “deceptive” advertising.

In response to the settlement, Kevin O’Leary – one of the investors the company nabbed on Shark Tank – said they proactively stopped manufacturing both versions of the Breathometer in 2015 prior to the FTC’s inquiry and have since shifted their focus to Mint, a connected oral health monitor.

Permalink to story.

 
Rather than the FTC fighting these products, they should be working to help make them an every day item. I'd love to keep one of these in my glove box.
 
Rather than the FTC fighting these products, they should be working to help make them an every day item. I'd love to keep one of these in my glove box.

I would think they would have to be cautious. I mean, if someone is drinking enough to be just barely under the limit (yes stupid, but it'll happen) and it wont be exactly accurate... and the person will be slightly over the limit and blame will ensue, in the best scenario.
 
Rather than the FTC fighting these products, they should be working to help make them an every day item. I'd love to keep one of these in my glove box.

I would think they would have to be cautious. I mean, if someone is drinking enough to be just barely under the limit (yes stupid, but it'll happen) and it wont be exactly accurate... and the person will be slightly over the limit and blame will ensue, in the best scenario.

Not necessarily how it works. In most states, if you blow over the limit, you are considered intoxicated.
Just because you blow "under" the limit, does not mean you are NOT impaired or intoxicated, it just means
by statue, the state will have a harder time proving you are intoxicated/impaired.
 
Man, I could've done with one of these gadgets when I was younger. It would've saved me a ton of scratch in roadside bribes but these days I'll never have a reason to buy one. Talk about to little, too late for me.
 
Just another suck & blow operation ..... can't they make up their minds? I mean other than the fact that they blew it and their product sucks?
 
Rather than the FTC fighting these products, they should be working to help make them an every day item. I'd love to keep one of these in my glove box.
This is an enabler type of device. If you are drinking enough to want to keep something like this "innovative" device, you should definitely NOT be driving.
 
This is an enabler type of device. If you are drinking enough to want to keep something like this "innovative" device, you should definitely NOT be driving.

It's an enabler device if you're irresponsible. I like the idea because I don't know what .08 feels like. I would use it to learn what is considered legally unsafe, and compare it to what I consider unsafe. Either way, the knowledge wouldn't hurt. You're quite judgy, though. Thanks for that.


Even though it doesn't work? Okay.
That's not really what this article is saying. The FTC alleged it understated BAC levels, but there's no mention they did any testing to back this up. The point the article makes is the company didn't do sufficient testing for it to ever have a shot at success. They failed, like many crowdfunded products do.

Not necessarily how it works. In most states, if you blow over the limit, you are considered intoxicated.
Just because you blow "under" the limit, does not mean you are NOT impaired or intoxicated, it just means
by statue, the state will have a harder time proving you are intoxicated/impaired.

Certainly. .08 feels different for everyone. While it's considered a conservative BAC level, I'm sure there are still people out there who shouldn't drive even under that. So I can't really argue the fact that some would grab this device, blow into it, and say "Oh hey, I can have one more!". Absolutely not how I would use it.

Ya'll are sitting on a moral high horse here! I just though it was a neat idea to learn what number correlates to what you consume.
 
It's an enabler device if you're irresponsible. I like the idea because I don't know what .08 feels like. I would use it to learn what is considered legally unsafe, and compare it to what I consider unsafe. Either way, the knowledge wouldn't hurt. You're quite judgy, though. Thanks for that.
It's super simple if you drink, don't drive. It's not about being judgmental, why risk it? Even if you are in the legal range, anything can happen and if you miss that 0,000001 sec that you needed to not hit that other car that ran over the stop sign and doesn't matter, you were driving under the influence, ok and let's suppose that by some miracle you don't get the blame and someone dies, or you get maimed, for that one drink... is it really worth it? Just take a cab or hand over the keys to someone.

Specially when you feel "good", your senses are not perfect.
 
It's super simple if you drink, don't drive. It's not about being judgmental, why risk it? Even if you are in the legal range, anything can happen and if you miss that 0,000001 sec that you needed to not hit that other car that ran over the stop sign and doesn't matter, you were driving under the influence, ok and let's suppose that by some miracle you don't get the blame and someone dies, or you get maimed, for that one drink... is it really worth it? Just take a cab or hand over the keys to someone.

Specially when you feel "good", your senses are not perfect.

Believe me, you're preaching to the wrong guy. I'd love if the world worked like that. I am also more than happy to DD my friends. But I'm also a realist - What you just described is not how the majority of people will ever do it. At least not where I'm from.
 
Believe me, you're preaching to the wrong guy. I'd love if the world worked like that. I am also more than happy to DD my friends. But I'm also a realist - What you just described is not how the majority of people will ever do it. At least not where I'm from.
Reason why this is an enabler =P
 
Back