I’m sure the millions and millions of people on powerful pain, anti-anxiety and anti-depressant meds are great drivers that always make rational, safe decisions on the road. But have a single beer or glass of wine with dinner and you’re a danger to everyone.
Has it ever been considered that the correlation between drinking alcohol and unsafe driving might be just that, a correlation but not always a direct causation? No doubt drinking heavily impairs motor function, however it might be the reasons behind the drinking (stress, depression, general recklessness, marriage, etc) that could be the main cause of accidents to which minor alcohol use is only a symptom, in some situations?
Not everyone who has a beer or a glass of wine will be a poorer driver than when they are totally alcohol free, in my opinion. The people that get into extreme accidents with such low levels of alcohol in their system probably have more going on to put them in the unsafe state of mind than a single Guinness.
Same guy, same foundation funding the research – and Matt, you should Google the foundation and see the article from 2008 re: prescrption drugs study they did.
15 December 2010
UC San Diego Study Suggests Link Between Sudden Infant Death and Alcohol
Not a happy holiday thought, but an important one: The number of babies who die of SIDS, or sudden infant death syndrome, surges by 33 percent on New Year’s Day. The suspected reason? Alcohol consumption by caretakers the night before.
Led by sociologist David Phillips of the University of California, San Diego, the study documenting the dramatic rise in SIDS deaths on New Year’s is published in the journal Addiction. The spike, write Phillips and his coauthors, is beyond the normal winter increase in SIDS.
Phillips and his coauthors found three types of evidence linking SIDS to alcohol. In addition to rising, just like alcohol consumption, more on New Year’s than at any other day of the year, SIDS and alcohol consumption also increase every weekend. And the SIDS death rate is abnormally high for children of alcohol-consuming mothers: Babies of mothers who drink are more than twice as likely to die of SIDS.
The study also found a rise in SIDS just after April 20 (or 4/20), a counterculture celebration of cannabis, and after July 4, which is also known as an inebriated time, though the rise on neither of these date is as dramatic as on New Year’s.
To see if parental sleeping-in might be at fault – rather than intoxication itself – the authors also checked to see what happens during the autumn shift to daylight savings, when many sleep later because an hour has been added to the day. There was no rise in SIDS, Phillips said.
Phillips urges further studies that might shed additional light on the relationship between alcohol and SIDS. Nonetheless, he said, it is not unreasonable even now to suggest that SIDS investigations inquire about the recent alcohol consumption of the infant’s caretakers and that pediatricians advise new parents that alcohol impairs their abilities and may endanger their children.
Has it ever been considered that the correlation between drinking alcohol and unsafe driving might be just that, a correlation but not always a direct causation? No doubt drinking heavily impairs motor function, however it might be the reasons behind the drinking (stress, depression, general recklessness, marriage, etc) that could be the drivers to which minor alcohol use is only a symptom in some situations?
Not everyone who has a beer or a glass of wine will be a poorer driver than when they are totally alcohol free, in my opinion. The people that get into extreme accidents with such low levels of alcohol in their system probably have more going on to put them in the unsafe state of mind than a single Guinness.
The biggest problem with this study is that it is based on FARS data, which is inadequate to the task because of seriously flawed assumptions about what is or isn’t considered an alcohol-related accident. Another major problem is that there isn’t any accurate way for officers at the scene (who fill out the FARS report) to estimate to what degree inattention factored in the accident. A number of studies in the past have proved that inattention is at least as dangerous as a blood alcohol level of 0.08. So is the use of sedating antihistamines. Are we going to put people in jail for getting into an accident after taking their allergy medications?
These are all just statistics. Did they factor in the amount of time that the alcohol was measured after the accident? In all cases I’m guessing the level of alcohol was higher at the time the accident occurred than when it was measured. What was the age of most of the intoxicated drivers? If they were majority younger drivers maybe there should be a more stringent limit for younger less experienced drivers, allowing responsible adults to still consume a glass of wine with dinner. If this is data that is going to be used to make the legal limit even lower, it’s shouldn’t have any holes.
Has it ever been considered that the correlation between drinking alcohol and unsafe driving might be just that, a correlation but not always a direct causation? No doubt drinking heavily impairs motor function, however it might be the reasons behind the drinking (stress, depression, general recklessness, marriage, etc) that could be the drivers to which minor alcohol use is only a symptom in some situations?
Not everyone who has a beer or a glass of wine will be a poorer driver than when they are totally alcohol free, in my opinion. The people that get into extreme accidents with such low levels of alcohol in their system probably have more going on to put them in the unsafe state of mind than a single Guinness.
I lived in Germany for 4 years and can say that nobody had a .05 BAC if you were out at night or for a game at the stadium, BUT… they had reliable taxis, street cars, buses and trains that all ran from central points in the city out to the suburbs at all hours of the day and night. If the US had that kind of transportation system set up drinking and driving becomes a near non-issue.
Has it ever been considered that the correlation between drinking alcohol and unsafe driving might be just that, a correlation but not always a direct causation? No doubt drinking heavily impairs motor function, however it might be the reasons behind the drinking (stress, depression, general recklessness, marriage, etc) that could be the drivers to which minor alcohol use is only a symptom in some situations?
Not everyone who has a beer or a glass of wine will be a poorer driver than when they are totally alcohol free, in my opinion. The people that get into extreme accidents with such low levels of alcohol in their system probably have more going on to put them in the unsafe state of mind than a single Guinness.
Get real. How much caffeine is unsafe? How much nicotine is unsafe? How few hours of sleep are unsafe? How angry is too angry to drive? How many french fries can you cram in your mouth while driving? None of these things are tested for. I’m sure they are all far more dangerous. What a worthless study.
There are so many studies that fly in the face of this one on drinking and driving. What they do is to pre-screen sets of data to see if they can make some type of match and BINGO – the FARS fit their money-making idea.
Would we have ever heard of the study if it did not have a dramatic conclusion – no. Also, there are scads of databases that have all of this info in one form or another.
Why would you only study fatal accidents and not the 99.9% of the other data. Scam!!!!
I have had three accidents in my life. All three were during the day, as I was leaving work, and I had nothing at all to drink. There are many times when I’ve had a beer with dinner and not gotten into an accident.
Therefore, I must conclude that I am a much better driver after I’ve had a beer or two. I have conclusive data to prove this. The only solution I can think of is to quit my job and go to a bar everyday instead.
1) After one or two beers, I am not impaired.
2) You apparently don’t understand sarcasm.
3) I’m assuming if your husband was qualified to take my position, he’d already have a job and wouldn’t need mine.
4) see response to #1
5) I am entitled to drive after I have one or two beers. As long as I am not impaired (which I am not after two beers – I’m 6-1, 240), I have every right to drive.
6) I am accident-free and violation-free. And there is no ‘d’ in privilege.
How about a study that proves that idiots should never get a license and that not driving causes more deaths since you will be more susceptible to being hit by a car walking down the road…
I too have analyzed the NHTSA FARS database quite extensively. The flaw with this research is that the researchers :
1. did not strip out imputed drinking drivers from their(imputed = made up with no proof supported by law enforcements reports)
2. count all fatalities rather than counting drivers involved in these crashes only.
So what do the REAL NHTSA FARS statistics show when you review the DB based on facts reported by law enforcement? It’s quite an eye opener.
In 2009 (the latest stats available in FARS) DRIVERS involved in a multi-vehicle crash involving a fatality are as follows:
Drivers involved in a all multi-vehicle crashes = 38,807
Drivers from above deemed sober based on current per se legislation: 36,549 (94%)
Drivers deemed impaired based on per se legislation: 2,258 (6%)
Impaired drivers that are above .12: 2,017 (82%)
Funny how the stats out of FARS show that SOBER drivers are doing 94% of the killing on the roads in 2009. A little fact these pro-MADD neo-prohibitionist organizations don’t tell you in these studies.
What your stats don’t tell us is what percentage of actual drivers on the road are impaired. For instance if 1% of all drivers on the road are impaired, but they account for 6% of fatalities, that would seem to indicate that impaired drivers are a far greater risk would it not?
I understand that FARS data may not be the most accurate, but many of you are going so far out of your way to disprove the findings that it sounds like you are actually saying it is ok to drive buzzed / drunk. Since we are only talking about drinking and driving and not distracted driving, can’t we all just agree that alcohol and motor vehicles do not mix?
I’m sure the millions and millions of people on powerful pain, anti-anxiety and anti-depressant meds are great drivers that always make rational, safe decisions on the road. But have a single beer or glass of wine with dinner and you’re a danger to everyone.
Yeah but driving with a BigMac, hairbrush, two screaming kids and the stereo cranked way up is just fine…
Has it ever been considered that the correlation between drinking alcohol and unsafe driving might be just that, a correlation but not always a direct causation? No doubt drinking heavily impairs motor function, however it might be the reasons behind the drinking (stress, depression, general recklessness, marriage, etc) that could be the main cause of accidents to which minor alcohol use is only a symptom, in some situations?
Not everyone who has a beer or a glass of wine will be a poorer driver than when they are totally alcohol free, in my opinion. The people that get into extreme accidents with such low levels of alcohol in their system probably have more going on to put them in the unsafe state of mind than a single Guinness.
Just my $0.02
Same guy, same foundation funding the research – and Matt, you should Google the foundation and see the article from 2008 re: prescrption drugs study they did.
15 December 2010
UC San Diego Study Suggests Link Between Sudden Infant Death and Alcohol
Not a happy holiday thought, but an important one: The number of babies who die of SIDS, or sudden infant death syndrome, surges by 33 percent on New Year’s Day. The suspected reason? Alcohol consumption by caretakers the night before.
Led by sociologist David Phillips of the University of California, San Diego, the study documenting the dramatic rise in SIDS deaths on New Year’s is published in the journal Addiction. The spike, write Phillips and his coauthors, is beyond the normal winter increase in SIDS.
Phillips and his coauthors found three types of evidence linking SIDS to alcohol. In addition to rising, just like alcohol consumption, more on New Year’s than at any other day of the year, SIDS and alcohol consumption also increase every weekend. And the SIDS death rate is abnormally high for children of alcohol-consuming mothers: Babies of mothers who drink are more than twice as likely to die of SIDS.
The study also found a rise in SIDS just after April 20 (or 4/20), a counterculture celebration of cannabis, and after July 4, which is also known as an inebriated time, though the rise on neither of these date is as dramatic as on New Year’s.
To see if parental sleeping-in might be at fault – rather than intoxication itself – the authors also checked to see what happens during the autumn shift to daylight savings, when many sleep later because an hour has been added to the day. There was no rise in SIDS, Phillips said.
Phillips urges further studies that might shed additional light on the relationship between alcohol and SIDS. Nonetheless, he said, it is not unreasonable even now to suggest that SIDS investigations inquire about the recent alcohol consumption of the infant’s caretakers and that pediatricians advise new parents that alcohol impairs their abilities and may endanger their children.
For those of you doing thumbs down, I was just pointing out the types of studies this guy does – and the common foundation that funds them.
Has it ever been considered that the correlation between drinking alcohol and unsafe driving might be just that, a correlation but not always a direct causation? No doubt drinking heavily impairs motor function, however it might be the reasons behind the drinking (stress, depression, general recklessness, marriage, etc) that could be the drivers to which minor alcohol use is only a symptom in some situations?
Not everyone who has a beer or a glass of wine will be a poorer driver than when they are totally alcohol free, in my opinion. The people that get into extreme accidents with such low levels of alcohol in their system probably have more going on to put them in the unsafe state of mind than a single Guinness.
Just my $0.02
The biggest problem with this study is that it is based on FARS data, which is inadequate to the task because of seriously flawed assumptions about what is or isn’t considered an alcohol-related accident. Another major problem is that there isn’t any accurate way for officers at the scene (who fill out the FARS report) to estimate to what degree inattention factored in the accident. A number of studies in the past have proved that inattention is at least as dangerous as a blood alcohol level of 0.08. So is the use of sedating antihistamines. Are we going to put people in jail for getting into an accident after taking their allergy medications?
These are all just statistics. Did they factor in the amount of time that the alcohol was measured after the accident? In all cases I’m guessing the level of alcohol was higher at the time the accident occurred than when it was measured. What was the age of most of the intoxicated drivers? If they were majority younger drivers maybe there should be a more stringent limit for younger less experienced drivers, allowing responsible adults to still consume a glass of wine with dinner. If this is data that is going to be used to make the legal limit even lower, it’s shouldn’t have any holes.
I belong to D.A.M.M.
Drunks Against Mad Mothers.
“Don’t ever drink and drive, you might hit a bump and spill it”
-Dean Martin (those were the good old days!)
Has it ever been considered that the correlation between drinking alcohol and unsafe driving might be just that, a correlation but not always a direct causation? No doubt drinking heavily impairs motor function, however it might be the reasons behind the drinking (stress, depression, general recklessness, marriage, etc) that could be the drivers to which minor alcohol use is only a symptom in some situations?
Not everyone who has a beer or a glass of wine will be a poorer driver than when they are totally alcohol free, in my opinion. The people that get into extreme accidents with such low levels of alcohol in their system probably have more going on to put them in the unsafe state of mind than a single Guinness.
Just my $0.02
I lived in Germany for 4 years and can say that nobody had a .05 BAC if you were out at night or for a game at the stadium, BUT… they had reliable taxis, street cars, buses and trains that all ran from central points in the city out to the suburbs at all hours of the day and night. If the US had that kind of transportation system set up drinking and driving becomes a near non-issue.
Has it ever been considered that the correlation between drinking alcohol and unsafe driving might be just that, a correlation but not always a direct causation? No doubt drinking heavily impairs motor function, however it might be the reasons behind the drinking (stress, depression, general recklessness, marriage, etc) that could be the drivers to which minor alcohol use is only a symptom in some situations?
Not everyone who has a beer or a glass of wine will be a poorer driver than when they are totally alcohol free, in my opinion. The people that get into extreme accidents with such low levels of alcohol in their system probably have more going on to put them in the unsafe state of mind than a single Guinness.
Get real. How much caffeine is unsafe? How much nicotine is unsafe? How few hours of sleep are unsafe? How angry is too angry to drive? How many french fries can you cram in your mouth while driving? None of these things are tested for. I’m sure they are all far more dangerous. What a worthless study.
As a statistician, I can say this is all bunko science. Their study on SIDS is not that good. This is the real deal. http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/sudden-infant-death-syndrome/DS00145
There are so many studies that fly in the face of this one on drinking and driving. What they do is to pre-screen sets of data to see if they can make some type of match and BINGO – the FARS fit their money-making idea.
Would we have ever heard of the study if it did not have a dramatic conclusion – no. Also, there are scads of databases that have all of this info in one form or another.
Why would you only study fatal accidents and not the 99.9% of the other data. Scam!!!!
We need to cut this guy’s “johnson” off so he doesn’t commit rape!
I have had three accidents in my life. All three were during the day, as I was leaving work, and I had nothing at all to drink. There are many times when I’ve had a beer with dinner and not gotten into an accident.
Therefore, I must conclude that I am a much better driver after I’ve had a beer or two. I have conclusive data to prove this. The only solution I can think of is to quit my job and go to a bar everyday instead.
Hills:
#1. Lucky for you that you didn’t get caught after drinking that beer or two with dinner.
#2. I’d like to see your “conclusive data” that you are a better driver after you have had “a beer or two”.
#3. Can my husband have your job? He’s been out of work for three years for reasons that are too lengthy to get into here.
#4. Better not be driving down the same street that either I or my family drive after you’ve had “a beer or two”.
#5. What gives you the right to feel that you are ENTITLED to drive after having “a beer or two”?!
#6. Last tiem I heard, driving was a PRIVLEDGE and not a right. Abuse the privledge and you pay the price!
Now, that’s MY $0.02!
1) After one or two beers, I am not impaired.
2) You apparently don’t understand sarcasm.
3) I’m assuming if your husband was qualified to take my position, he’d already have a job and wouldn’t need mine.
4) see response to #1
5) I am entitled to drive after I have one or two beers. As long as I am not impaired (which I am not after two beers – I’m 6-1, 240), I have every right to drive.
6) I am accident-free and violation-free. And there is no ‘d’ in privilege.
my .04 cents
How about a study that proves that idiots should never get a license and that not driving causes more deaths since you will be more susceptible to being hit by a car walking down the road…
I too have analyzed the NHTSA FARS database quite extensively. The flaw with this research is that the researchers :
1. did not strip out imputed drinking drivers from their(imputed = made up with no proof supported by law enforcements reports)
2. count all fatalities rather than counting drivers involved in these crashes only.
So what do the REAL NHTSA FARS statistics show when you review the DB based on facts reported by law enforcement? It’s quite an eye opener.
In 2009 (the latest stats available in FARS) DRIVERS involved in a multi-vehicle crash involving a fatality are as follows:
Drivers involved in a all multi-vehicle crashes = 38,807
Drivers from above deemed sober based on current per se legislation: 36,549 (94%)
Drivers deemed impaired based on per se legislation: 2,258 (6%)
Impaired drivers that are above .12: 2,017 (82%)
Funny how the stats out of FARS show that SOBER drivers are doing 94% of the killing on the roads in 2009. A little fact these pro-MADD neo-prohibitionist organizations don’t tell you in these studies.
Good day.
What your stats don’t tell us is what percentage of actual drivers on the road are impaired. For instance if 1% of all drivers on the road are impaired, but they account for 6% of fatalities, that would seem to indicate that impaired drivers are a far greater risk would it not?
Really? Sociologists are the closest they can come to actual scientists to prove things to match their agenda? Pathetic.
Equating statistical correlation with cause and effect is often illogical and often risky, but we never engage in risky behaviors — or do we?
I understand that FARS data may not be the most accurate, but many of you are going so far out of your way to disprove the findings that it sounds like you are actually saying it is ok to drive buzzed / drunk. Since we are only talking about drinking and driving and not distracted driving, can’t we all just agree that alcohol and motor vehicles do not mix?