Thank you for the question.
I think, in determining where you want to go, you probably need to start with the Supreme Court's decision, which makes it abundantly clear that, absent negligence.... Sorry, let me back up.
The court has taken a strong position that, absent fault, we will not be able to enter convictions for criminal offences. There are fundamental elements of an offence that have to be made out. If the science suggests that alcohol is capable of putting an accused in a situation where they are no longer acting voluntarily, or where they lack one of the elements of offence necessary to make out the offence, then, unless we can show negligence in consumption, they should not be convicted.
I suspect that your question is best directed to a toxicologist, a neurologist or a doctor who is an expert in the area of the impact of alcohol—