> If electrocution is what caused the cardiac arrest, it is much better to give breaths than compressions. The heartbeat system resets itself before the respiratory system. The problem is then that the heart is back, uses up all its energy reserves, but there is no oxygen to replenish and the heart goes back into arrest.

Can you provide a reference or citation to this claim and practice?

It is always much better to give "conventional CPR" (breaths and chest compressions) if suitably trained.[1] If not suitably trained you are more likely to a) perform CPR and b) do it effectively if not providing mouth to mouth breathing.[2][3] You can argue about the nuance of particular patient groups where there is potentially a statistically significant benefit of providing conventional CPR over compression only.

Under no circumstances are there benefits to providing rescue breaths without chest compressions (as your comment seems to recommend).

[1]: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/21273279/ [2]: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/7726702/ [3]: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/17420082/