JAMS does use EtG testing, sometimes through a lab in Colorado and in some cases through Forensic Fluids Laboratory in Kalamazoo. You should note that these tests are considered "experimental" by the US Dept of Health and Human Services, which issued an advisory against their use in judicial settings in 2006. Recent studies have shown that EtG tests are highly subject to false positives because the test does not detect alcohol, but EtG, which is a metabolite of alcohol. (In other words, if you drink alcohol, your body produces EtG through metabolism.) Although anyone who drinks alcohol will produce EtG, not everyone who has EtG in their system necessarily drank alcohol. EtG may be present due to bacterial infection of the sample post-collection, inhalation of ethyl alcohol vapors from hand sanitizer and hair spray, and even the ingestion of baker's yeast. There are no standardized cut-off levels for detection because (a) the technology is so new, and (b) recent studies have shown that there is a great variety in the way in which each person metabolizes ethyl alcohol (meaning two people may be exposed to the same amount of ethyl alcohol in the same manner, but may have dramatically different levels of EtG after metabolism). The tests JAMS sends to Forensic Fluids are typically saliva tests, and these tests were developed extremely recently, so it is difficult at best to assess their scientific reliability. FF claims these tests are more accurate and reliable than the urine testing, but the problem remains that they are still testing for EtG, which in and of itself is an unreliable indicator of alcohol consumption. These tests should NOT be admissible for this purpose in court, and many courts have ruled as much because the tests are unreliable. SO: IF YOU GET HIT FOR A PROBATION VIOLATION FOR ALCOHOL CONSUMPTION BASED ON AN ETG TEST, YOU SHOULD RETAIN AN ATTORNEY AND FIGHT IT.
