What is the debate over the Intoxilyzer's reliability and accuracy?

The potential reliability flaws debated are too numerous to cover them all here. However, of particular importance are:

• Neither the manufacturer nor the DPS will allow anyone, other than law enforcement personnel, to test either the machine's accuracy or its reliability. It is generally understood that for a procedure to be accepted as accurate and reliable in science, that it must be open and available for the scientific community to test and re-test the procedure. This is not the case with the Intoxilyzer.
• The manufacturer does not warrant that the Intoxilyzer is fit for any particular purpose. This fact clearly is an implicit admission by the manufacturer that its machine is not even warranted as accurate and reliable for breath testing.
• The Intoxilyzer is capable of breath preservation. However, our DPS purposely fails to require the breath specimens to be saved. So, while re testing of preserved breath specimens could be done by a more accurate and reliable method known as gas chromatography, those accused are prevented from doing so.
• The Intoxilyzer's working design is premised on the assumption that every person tested is exactly the same. All persons are not the same! This is especially important here with regard to blood/breath ratios (the number of times an item appears in the blood vs. the number of times the same item appears in the breath). Persons with a lower blood/breath ratio than that assumed by the Intoxilyzer will be prejudiced because the Intoxilyzer results will be artificially high. Thus, such a person whose blood alcohol concentration may be only .04, .05, .06, etc. will actually test out at .08, .11, .12, etc.