Interestsing study results

Interestsing study results (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

Lucylastic -> Interestsing study results (2/15/2015 7:10:37 PM)
This from the Wapo. http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2015/02/09/stoned-drivers-are-a-lot-safer-than-drunk-ones-new-federal-data-show/ A new study from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration finds that drivers who use marijuana are at a significantly lower risk for a crash than drivers who use alcohol. And after adjusting for age, gender, race and alcohol use, drivers who tested positive for marijuana were no more likely to crash than who had not used any drugs or alcohol prior to driving. Theres more at the link but the report is from the following NHTSA link http://www.nhtsa.gov/staticfiles/nti/pdf/812117-Drug_and_Alcohol_Crash_Risk.pdf

slvemike4u -> RE: Interestsing study results (2/15/2015 7:20:17 PM)
Sheeesh,I'm not much for statistics and what not,but I could have saved these guys the money that they spent conducting this study. I know when I was younger and did things one ought not do....I was at much greater risk after a few drinks than I was bopping down the road with a fatty in my hand[:D] That still goes as far as the fatty....lol

MercTech -> RE: Interestsing study results (2/15/2015 7:56:06 PM)
Meh, you still should not operate heavy machinery when impaired. But, sometimes you still have to drive to the doctor when you really shouldn't. <sigh>

joether -> RE: Interestsing study results (2/16/2015 4:25:10 AM)
Subsequently one is just as dangerous on the road do to lack of sleep as they are drunk. So please get plenty of sleep before those long road trips. Take breaks every two or three hours off the road and stay at a nice motel/hotel if your not at your destination.

KenDckey -> RE: Interestsing study results (2/16/2015 8:58:29 AM)
How about we just don't do either. Just sayin

Lucylastic -> RE: Interestsing study results (2/16/2015 9:02:30 AM)
how would you accomplish that?

slvemike4u -> RE: Interestsing study results (2/16/2015 9:24:11 AM)
I think he meant either drinking or smoking.....and yeah,how we going to enforce that ? [:D][:D][:D][:D] Happy people tend to do things,some of which Mr. Dckey disapproves of

Lucylastic -> RE: Interestsing study results (2/16/2015 9:44:40 AM)
Its like saying we should all be better people according to whose definition?

slvemike4u -> RE: Interestsing study results (2/16/2015 11:43:43 AM)
Mine ,of course.....and whichever Domme is currently pulling my strings [:D]

Gauge -> RE: Interestsing study results (2/16/2015 12:25:18 PM)
This is a fast reply. I would still like to see a side-to-side comparison in a timed reaction test. According to what I have read on the subject of marijuana use and driving, there is a reduction in reaction time as well as an increase in that reduction as the tasks become more complicated. The study is fine, but it doesn't say that stoned driving is safer to do, it just says that the crash data is lower.

Lucylastic -> RE: Interestsing study results (2/16/2015 12:34:28 PM)
Makes you wonder why they havent done them Gauge. Its a fair test.

slvemike4u -> RE: Interestsing study results (2/16/2015 12:40:27 PM)
Actually Gauge,as someone who has conducted many,many actual field tests,I can agree with the slower reaction time thing....but here's the rub. Someone high on pot,as opposed to alcohol,actually slows down his driving as a result of the mellow high he is experiencing...so the slower reaction time sort of balances out. Now the drunk does not slow down,as a matter of fac,er opinion the drunk tends to be more liberal in applying pressure to the gas pedal....cause he's.....well drunk.[:D]

Gauge -> RE: Interestsing study results (2/16/2015 1:57:03 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Lucylastic Makes you wonder why they havent done them Gauge. Its a fair test. I don't know that they haven't been done, frankly I didn't look for any. I agree that it would be a fair test.

Gauge -> RE: Interestsing study results (2/16/2015 2:17:46 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: slvemike4u Actually Gauge,as someone who has conducted many,many actual field tests,I can agree with the slower reaction time thing....but here's the rub. Someone high on pot,as opposed to alcohol,actually slows down his driving as a result of the mellow high he is experiencing...so the slower reaction time sort of balances out. Now the drunk does not slow down,as a matter of fac,er opinion the drunk tends to be more liberal in applying pressure to the gas pedal....cause he's.....well drunk.[:D] No, I'm sorry, the slower reaction time does not balance out because the driver typically drives a little slower. Reduced speeds by their nature are safer than increased speeds, however reaction time in both cases is equal in importance. Whatever your "field experience" is, I want to see hard data.

bounty44 -> RE: Interestsing study results (2/16/2015 2:23:58 PM)
that cannot be so gauge---if im going 60 miles an hour and drive off the road, I may have one second to react to the trees that are in front me. if I am going 30, I have double that time. reaction time is important in both cases yes, but much more so in the first instance. whether or not that is enough to make a difference (or balances out) in the cases we are talking about here is another question. that said---I haven't read the post article yet nor the actual journal article that inspired it but I hope to soon...

kdsub -> RE: Interestsing study results (2/16/2015 5:32:03 PM)
I don't know... this Times article says different. Even if alcohol is more dangerous... pot is still dangerous when driving and there has been an upswing in stoned drivers. So now we have both kinds of dumb asses. Butch

Gauge -> RE: Interestsing study results (2/16/2015 5:36:06 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: bounty44 that cannot be so gauge---if im going 60 miles an hour and drive off the road, I may have one second to react to the trees that are in front me. if I am going 30, I have double that time. reaction time is important in both cases yes, but much more so in the first instance. whether or not that is enough to make a difference (or balances out) in the cases we are talking about here is another question. that said---I haven't read the post article yet nor the actual journal article that inspired it but I hope to soon... Sure, in that instance, your time is longer to be sure. However, driving through the city at 30 MPH and a kid runs out in the street your reaction time matters equally. Sorry, you cannot pick and choose scenarios to defend reaction time. Impaired reaction is impaired reaction regardless.

slvemike4u -> RE: Interestsing study results (2/16/2015 5:45:07 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Gauge quote: ORIGINAL: slvemike4u Actually Gauge,as someone who has conducted many,many actual field tests,I can agree with the slower reaction time thing....but here's the rub. Someone high on pot,as opposed to alcohol,actually slows down his driving as a result of the mellow high he is experiencing...so the slower reaction time sort of balances out. Now the drunk does not slow down,as a matter of fac,er opinion the drunk tends to be more liberal in applying pressure to the gas pedal....cause he's.....well drunk.[:D] No, I'm sorry, the slower reaction time does not balance out because the driver typically drives a little slower. Reduced speeds by their nature are safer than increased speeds, however reaction time in both cases is equal in importance. Whatever your "field experience" is, I want to see hard data. Well,er....there is no hard data,no statistics cause all the tests run were ultimately successful.Never had a problem reaching my destination .Now in hindsight was that the wisest course available to me....probably not,but I'm thankful I never paid for my stupidity by hurting anyone or myself.

joether -> RE: Interestsing study results (2/16/2015 8:36:22 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Lucylastic Makes you wonder why they havent done them Gauge. Its a fair test. Mostly because the substance was outlawed in the nation. I would like to see a test with weed, alcohol. sleep deprivation, and texting. First, have a close circuit road test of all the drivers. This would be considered the 'control' for the experiment. Rate how well each driver does. The road course could have obstacles they have to navigate around or not to hit (including a sudden stop). Then take 24 hours for the actual test. Texting and the week would not need to much 'lead time', but the human body does need time to feel the effects of sleep deprivation and being drunk. I think the underlying observation is: Dont do this crap if you can afford it.

MrRodgers -> RE: Interestsing study results (2/16/2015 9:50:39 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: slvemike4u Actually Gauge,as someone who has conducted many,many actual field tests,I can agree with the slower reaction time thing....but here's the rub. Someone high on pot,as opposed to alcohol,actually slows down his driving as a result of the mellow high he is experiencing...so the slower reaction time sort of balances out. Now the drunk does not slow down,as a matter of fac,er opinion the drunk tends to be more liberal in applying pressure to the gas pedal....cause he's.....well drunk.[:D] Well back in the day when I got high and drove, you could catch a turtle piss'n on my tire.

Page: [1] 2 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.03125