Interesting. I see they did no research on people driving while trying to text or or talk on a cell phone. I wonder which action disturbs a driver’s ability to drive more. 0.06 alcohol or using a phone to talk or text?
Even a conversation over the phone disturbs the ability to drive. Mythbusters never tried texting and driving versus drunk driving though, so the “jury” is still out on that one.
Dave, perhaps it depends upon the age of the driver. I agree with your pretext (I think you are implying) that texting is as if not more dangerous. Nonetheless,this is a fascinating study. If true, we have not educated this group well on that exposure.
I agree with you Libby. However, they said “She warned that the absence of effects in this laboratory setting does not mean that young adult drivers’ driving wouldn’t be affected in normal circumstances, driving in a typical, real-world setting.” Why couldn’t the opposite be true. That baby boomers might do better in a real world situation and they’re just not good with simulators. I know, that’s bs, but I’m part of the baby boomer group, so I felt compelled to stick up for them.
Although the article is interesting, I didn’t see any reference to the alcohol consumption habits of the individuals prior to the test.
The younger group would tend to drink more and more often than the older (should I add wider) group and would therefore have a higher tolerance to the effects of alcohol than th oledr group.
It is possible that it was factored in and not mentioned but it seems like a rather important point that the groups regularly consume similar amounts of alcohol outside the test.
Reaction times are certainly slower as we age and that definitely impacts one’s ability to drive safely. Still interesting to hear that alcohol impacts older folks more than younger folks. And I’m still interested in how low consumption of alcohol impacts driving ability as compared to texting or talking on a non-hands free device or even a hands free device.
What a flawed study, surely a waste of taxpayers money. Statistics are on the side of drivers who drink, only a very minute percentage have accidents. After all, the various State legislatures condone drinking and driving or else the threshold would be ZERO.
Sorry, Libby, that your health is failing so fast, maybe a better diet would help.
How could this study be flawed and a waste of taxpayer money? If you poll drivers who drink and do not get into an accident, that reflects 100% positive result, right?
As for legislatures condone drinking & driving, who do you think the biggest offenders would be?
Another study created with the explicit political goal of furthering neo-prohibitionist efforts. I have said it again, and again, and again– and I’ll keep saying it, since the “zero point zero zero” crowd won’t stop trying to skew public opinion on this matter– 0.04 BAC drivers are NOT the problem. Severely drunk drivers are the problem.
These people want you to get a DWI– at a cost of at least $10,000 and possible career loss– for having a single 12 ounce beer with dinner and then driving home. Meanwhile, John Doe with seventeen prior DWI convictions and a 0.35 BAC will be the one killing a van full of people.
See these articles for what they are– Neoprohibitionist propaganda.
Interesting. I see they did no research on people driving while trying to text or or talk on a cell phone. I wonder which action disturbs a driver’s ability to drive more. 0.06 alcohol or using a phone to talk or text?
Even a conversation over the phone disturbs the ability to drive. Mythbusters never tried texting and driving versus drunk driving though, so the “jury” is still out on that one.
http://www.discovery.com/tv-shows/mythbusters/mythbusters-database/cell-phone-and-driving.htm
Dave, perhaps it depends upon the age of the driver. I agree with your pretext (I think you are implying) that texting is as if not more dangerous. Nonetheless,this is a fascinating study. If true, we have not educated this group well on that exposure.
I can’t do anything like I could 20 years ago!
I agree with you Libby. However, they said “She warned that the absence of effects in this laboratory setting does not mean that young adult drivers’ driving wouldn’t be affected in normal circumstances, driving in a typical, real-world setting.” Why couldn’t the opposite be true. That baby boomers might do better in a real world situation and they’re just not good with simulators. I know, that’s bs, but I’m part of the baby boomer group, so I felt compelled to stick up for them.
Although the article is interesting, I didn’t see any reference to the alcohol consumption habits of the individuals prior to the test.
The younger group would tend to drink more and more often than the older (should I add wider) group and would therefore have a higher tolerance to the effects of alcohol than th oledr group.
It is possible that it was factored in and not mentioned but it seems like a rather important point that the groups regularly consume similar amounts of alcohol outside the test.
All this shows is that the older we get, the less we can do like we used to.
We needed a study for that???
Reaction times are certainly slower as we age and that definitely impacts one’s ability to drive safely. Still interesting to hear that alcohol impacts older folks more than younger folks. And I’m still interested in how low consumption of alcohol impacts driving ability as compared to texting or talking on a non-hands free device or even a hands free device.
I can’t party & drive like I used to either!
What a flawed study, surely a waste of taxpayers money. Statistics are on the side of drivers who drink, only a very minute percentage have accidents. After all, the various State legislatures condone drinking and driving or else the threshold would be ZERO.
Sorry, Libby, that your health is failing so fast, maybe a better diet would help.
How could this study be flawed and a waste of taxpayer money? If you poll drivers who drink and do not get into an accident, that reflects 100% positive result, right?
As for legislatures condone drinking & driving, who do you think the biggest offenders would be?
And don’t be picking on my Libby!
Thanks, Nah.
Realist, if you are over the age of 50, can you still do everything the same as you did at 25? If so, you are a remarkable human being!
Another study created with the explicit political goal of furthering neo-prohibitionist efforts. I have said it again, and again, and again– and I’ll keep saying it, since the “zero point zero zero” crowd won’t stop trying to skew public opinion on this matter– 0.04 BAC drivers are NOT the problem. Severely drunk drivers are the problem.
These people want you to get a DWI– at a cost of at least $10,000 and possible career loss– for having a single 12 ounce beer with dinner and then driving home. Meanwhile, John Doe with seventeen prior DWI convictions and a 0.35 BAC will be the one killing a van full of people.
See these articles for what they are– Neoprohibitionist propaganda.