Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Stoned drivers are safer than drunk ones, new federal data show

washingtonpost.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 281 posts

Re: Stoned drivers are safer than drunk ones, new federal data show

#131

Post by draw_down »

iconjack wrote: post #126

From the comments here, it seems like people either didn't read the article, or just don't believe the study, because it pretty much says it is ok to smoke and drive. For marijuana, and for a number of other legal and illegal drugs including antidepressants, painkillers, stimulants and the like, there is no statistically significant change in the risk of a crash associated with using that drug prior to driving.

As I mentioned in my other comment, people do not want to hear about studies or other data indicating that marijuana is less dangerous than alcohol. They just do not want to hear it.

Re: Stoned drivers are safer than drunk ones, new federal data show

#132

Post by emp_zealoth »

CPLX wrote: post #102
justizin wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> There are lot's of medications which people should take before driving, like anti-seizure, antipsychotics, heart control, blood sugar control, and so on. anxiety, depression, etc... there's some overlap here, some people use cannabis to prevent/control seizures, to treat anxiety or depression, and don't feel side effects. The experience of the common person who has tried cannabis once or twice and turned away isn't…

> You wouldn't say that a person with ADHD shouldn't drive on ADHD meds, but for anyone else, that would be effectively like driving on cocaine. I thought it was pretty interesting actually, the big chart in the linked article suggests that stimulants actually lower the likelihood of an accident compared to a baseline.

I once had to drive myself few hundred kilometers back home after a discharge from a psych ward - i was taking some new variation of activisation pill intended to make me less apathetic. While usually I am super careful, will yield/brake preventively to avoid an accident (haven't had one yet - in big part thanks to mindfulness and survival instict) - in the begining that medicine just threw it out the window. I quite literally YOLO'd head on with an 18-wheeler because my brain just went OVERTAKE NOW, BITCH. (did not crash, it was just incredibly stupid and tight) Took me some time to adjust and stop being riddiculously reckless.

Same with nausea suppression pills for travel. I was once made to drive after taking one.

I'd venture to say that the lower likelyhood of an accident while on cocaine would come from most people that not pay any goddamn attention to anything, frantically scanning everything: the road, traffic, road shoulder, pedestrains, etc, etc

Re: Stoned drivers are safer than drunk ones, new federal data show

#133

Post by ssmoot »

corin_ wrote: post #122
dimino wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If pot is proven to not affect your driving to a measurable degree What??

The very second sentence of the article reads: "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." Edit: Just in case in the future anyone comes across my comment out of context of this thread, I'd like to add that without seeing further research I'm not personally convinced by…

Since testing positive just means that you might have used anytime in the past month or so, that's not meaningful.

The study linked in the article confirms that yes, according to the evidence seen, marijuana significantly impairs driving ability, especially among casual users (to the surprise of no one whose actually used it I'm sure).

Re: Stoned drivers are safer than drunk ones, new federal data show

#134

Post by [deleted] »

corin_ wrote: post #122
dimino wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If pot is proven to not affect your driving to a measurable degree What??

The very second sentence of the article reads: "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." Edit: Just in case in the future anyone comes across my comment out of context of this thread, I'd like to add that without seeing further research I'm not personally convinced by…

[deleted]

Re: Stoned drivers are safer than drunk ones, new federal data show

#135

Post by striking »

kafkaesq wrote: post #128
JPKab wrote: post #3

As a full supporter of cannabis legalization, I'm also a big supporter of a technology that can instantly detect whether someone's reflexes are impaired by cannabis. Notice that I'm focusing on whether or not they are impaired, as opposed to the amount in their bloodstream. The point being that people that use cannabis regularly for medical reasons don't seem to be impaired by it at all, while newer or more occasiona…

I'm a big supporter of a technology that can instantly detect whether someone's reflexes are impaired by cannabis. Wow. So you're also a big supporter of the massive, real-time surveillance infrastructure required to make this possible, then. Don't think for a minute that those devices (which will inevitably be required in all human-driven cars... for as long as humans are allowed to drive cars, that is) won't be rep…

I think parent commenter meant a device that can check the impairment of a person's reflexes, physically, when asked. Like a breathalyzer for reflexes.

Re: Stoned drivers are safer than drunk ones, new federal data show

#136

Post by nostrebored »

justizin wrote: post #100
Someone1234 wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> on any medication at all (including over the counter drugs) I assume you mean any medication which may impair you. There are lot's of medications which people should take before driving, like anti-seizure, antipsychotics, heart control, blood sugar control, and so on. It will typically tell you on the label if it is safe to take and operate heavy machinery. Although I'd always suggest taking it the first time while…

> There are lot's of medications which people should take before driving, like anti-seizure, antipsychotics, heart control, blood sugar control, and so on. anxiety, depression, etc... there's some overlap here, some people use cannabis to prevent/control seizures, to treat anxiety or depression, and don't feel side effects. The experience of the common person who has tried cannabis once or twice and turned away isn't…

Stimulants have been shown to decrease your risk of accidents multiple times. Cannabis on the other hand has been shown to impair you ability to react, pay attention to multiple tasks, your metacognition... There's a huge difference here.

If you drive frequently, maybe cannabis isn't a good idea for you to take to manage your anxiety, depression, or seizure control. If there's not a drug out there that helps you that does not make you a danger to others, then tough shit, you shouldn't be driving.

Driving is not a right, driving is not something everyone should be able to do. I think I would be a sub par driver, and so I don't drive. I pay more money to live in the city close to public transit. I don't say "it will probably be ok" and endanger other drivers, and this would be especially true if I actually needed pot to function.

Re: Stoned drivers are safer than drunk ones, new federal data show

#137

Post by metaphorm »

JPKab wrote: post #3

As a full supporter of cannabis legalization, I'm also a big supporter of a technology that can instantly detect whether someone's reflexes are impaired by cannabis. Notice that I'm focusing on whether or not they are impaired, as opposed to the amount in their bloodstream. The point being that people that use cannabis regularly for medical reasons don't seem to be impaired by it at all, while newer or more occasiona…

I'm not sure I understand what you're proposing. What is a credible test of impairment that can be administered automatically, remotely, anonymously, and with a high enough degree of accuracy and reliability (mitigation of false positives and false negatives), that we could feel ok about legislating around it?

Re: Stoned drivers are safer than drunk ones, new federal data show

#139

Post by random_upvoter »

Davidp00 wrote: post #124
dimino wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If pot is proven to not affect your driving to a measurable degree What??

From the article 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.

You have to take into account that the population under study -- drivers who tested positive for marijuana -- are people who consumed some amount of marijuana AND judged themselves capable of driving. Some pot smokers will exclude themselves from this population because they estimate that they can no longer drive safely -- myself being one of them. So from this study you cannot conclude that, in general, smoking pot does not affect your driving skills.

Re: Stoned drivers are safer than drunk ones, new federal data show

#140

Post by namlem »

beat wrote: post #7

Alcohol has two synergetic problems for drivers... it reduces reflexes and increases confidence, simultaneously. Less capable, and more aggressive. No wonder it's so awful for drivers. Marijuana doesn't significantly impair reflexes (as generations of musicians have shown). As for judgment, it tends to make users more cautious, not more aggressive. They're not trying to get around that car in front of them to blow th…

I've driven high plenty of times in the past (not anymore though) and the issue is not one of reflexes or judgement, but attention. Being high makes you really easily distracted, and, in my experience, more likely to take your eyes off the road for longer periods of time. That's where the risk comes from.
Post reply on HN