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

Over 40% of deceased drivers in vehicle crashes test positive for THC: Study

facs.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

471–480 of 523 posts

Re: Over 40% of deceased drivers in vehicle crashes test positive for THC: Study

#471

Post by [deleted] »

nobodyandproud wrote: post #112
quickthrowman wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I can smoke a lot of weed and not “feel high” yet I would test off the charts on this test. > With marijuana it’s not. So until we have a valid method of testing if someone is “too stoned to drive” we have to push back on any attempt to classify marijuana users as ineligible to drive. I agree. As someone who regularly consumes 250mg of edibles daily at a minimum, I’m sure my levels would be off the charts on a cons…

There are individuals that have a high tolerance of alcohol. Thankfully society didn’t make exceptions. Eventually. I see THC taking the same, slow, tortured approach.

[deleted]

Re: Over 40% of deceased drivers in vehicle crashes test positive for THC: Study

#472

Post by mattmaroon »

metadope wrote: post #226
Youden wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There was a larger discussion in a previous thread on this topic: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45494730 Since then, [0] has been published and I think it's worth at least a skim. Since it's quite recent the introduction summarizes some of the most recent research. The things that jump out at me are: - [0]: Habitual users with baseline concentrations above legal limits perform just as well as habitual users wi…

> the number of drivers in accidents with THC in their blood is going up because the number of people with THC in their blood is going up This. In just the short time since legalization, recreational use in my immediate vicinity (a small Ohio village, one stop light) has decidedly, undeniably increased. I offer only an anecdotal observation, but my evening walks around town are now accompanied by a dank potpourri of…

The study in the post we’re responding to has actual data to show otherwise. The data was collected both before and after legalization (and Ohio is one of the states studied) and did not find a significant increase.

Weed was already easy to get. Any high schooler would have told you it was easier to get than beer BECAUSE it was illegal, nobody had a lucrative license to use for selling it to a minor.

Re: Over 40% of deceased drivers in vehicle crashes test positive for THC: Study

#473

Post by Zak »

faidit wrote: post #446
Zak wrote: post #394

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Seat belt warnings became mandatory in the USA in 1972[0]. From the mid 1970s until fairly recently, the warning tone would stop after a few seconds. [0] https://www.nationalacademies.org/read/10832/chapter/5

I've known people who would just endure the warning noise until it stopped.

My parents disabled a couple by pulling a fuse or cutting a wire, but a lot of their use of the vehicles was off road at walking speeds. They wore seat belts on the road.

Re: Over 40% of deceased drivers in vehicle crashes test positive for THC: Study

#474

Post by thatcat »

bigstrat2003 wrote: post #406
malikolivier wrote: post #374

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've never smelled cannabis before in my life and don't know what it's supposed to smell like. I live in an area of the world where it's illegal and I guess not many people are smoking it. I may also have had a quite sheltered education. This year, I went to British Columbia, and there was this weird scent everywhere that I could not describe. My wife said it was cannabis. I'm still not used to it so I don't know if…

In my experience, weed smells like a skunk. Which makes it really annoying to be around people who smoke, that stuff is really unpleasant to have to smell. Honestly I don't know how people can stand to smoke it with how bad it smells.

Different weed smells different, skunk weed has volitale sulfur compounds, others varieties lack this and may smell like fruit or rosemary.

Re: Over 40% of deceased drivers in vehicle crashes test positive for THC: Study

#475

Post by edgineer »

lisbbb wrote: post #351
rayiner wrote: post #247

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Same thing in DC. I thought the new development in DC where we lived had a major sewer gas problem. Turns out it was marijuana.

[flagged]

Living in proximity to people who don't care enough to not be annoying to others has a few ways you can look at it. But I suggest you consider upgrading the cabin air filter in your car. There are likely options with activated carbon to help reduce odors. This was actually a factor in my decision to go Tesla: their models S and X have an additional massive HEPA filter, and absolutely no outside smells make it into the car.

Re: Over 40% of deceased drivers in vehicle crashes test positive for THC: Study

#476

Post by nateb2022 »

nialse wrote: post #437
nateb2022 wrote: post #421

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To give some statistical context, as of 2023, about 16.11% of people in the US have used cannabis in the past year; per that same dataset, about 16.53% of Ohio residents. [1] Given that Ohio’s usage metrics align closely with the national mean, I think it's fair to use the state as a proxy for broader domestic trends. Per more Pew Research data, also from 2023, Ohio seems to have an average, if not a less than averag…

You cannot pick and choose one or two variables and then claim representativeness based on a numerical match. The first step is to identify the confounding variables that are likely to influence the outcome. Only after those are specified a comparison set can be defined and matching or adjustment criteria applied. Without that process, agreement on a small number of aggregate measures does not establish that the unde…

I'll concede this, however in large-scale demographic data, when the central tendencies of two populations align so closely, it is statistically unlikely that their underlying distributions are radically different. It puts the burden of proof on the idea that Ohio is somehow an outlier, rather than the idea that it's a standard sample. Otherwise, were we to attempt to account for every confounding variable, we would be letting the perfect be the enemy of the good.

Re: Over 40% of deceased drivers in vehicle crashes test positive for THC: Study

#477

Post by boston_clone »

rayiner wrote: post #453
boston_clone wrote: post #396

Earlier quoted context omitted.

hell yeah for being in that 5%! but why bring classism into it? in states where it’s more normalized, it’s pretty even across those differentiators: https://doh.wa.gov/data-and-statistical-reports/washington-t...

Explaining why I never encountered it. Even today usage is quite unevenly distributed. I’m from an affluent, WASPy town in Virginia. By contrast it was common even in the 1990s in the lower class parts of Oregon where my wife grew up.

Interesting. In my experience, the self-described affluent WASP-y types are exactly the kind of people that should probably smoke a joint and chill the fuck out every once in a while, lest they end up as close-minded conservatives.

Thanks for sharing!

Re: Over 40% of deceased drivers in vehicle crashes test positive for THC: Study

#478

Post by zingababba »

Aurornis wrote: post #172
terminalshort wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But the truth is that habitual users are always impaired. Source: former habitual user.

I’ve never been a smoker, but I’ve known a lot of friends who went through periods of smoking multiple times per week or even daily for periods of time. Every single one of them denied impairment during those periods. Often vehemently so, belittling anyone who suggested they might be impaired as having succumbed to propaganda. Every single one of them remarked that they were sharper, more alert, and had better memory…

Every pot smoker is convinced it enhances their life while it ultimately just devolves them all into the exact same personality.

Re: Over 40% of deceased drivers in vehicle crashes test positive for THC: Study

#479

Post by solumunus »

Aurornis wrote: post #147
solumunus wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There’s also an association with having drank water and been in a car crash. This on its own can’t reasonably inform any opinions, more context is required.

> There’s also an association with having drank water and been in a car crash This is blatantly intellectually dishonest. If 100% of people drink water then it’s not surprising when 100% of people in car crashes have been drinking water. If less than 40% of the population has impairment levels of THC at any given time but 40% of deceased car crash drivers have impairment levels of THC in their blood, you can’t preten…

> If less than 40% of the population has impairment levels of THC at any given time but 40% of deceased car crash drivers have impairment levels of THC in their blood

Yes, IF. That was my point.

Re: Over 40% of deceased drivers in vehicle crashes test positive for THC: Study

#480

Post by nobody9999 »

Scoundreller wrote: post #279
metadope wrote: post #226

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> the number of drivers in accidents with THC in their blood is going up because the number of people with THC in their blood is going up This. In just the short time since legalization, recreational use in my immediate vicinity (a small Ohio village, one stop light) has decidedly, undeniably increased. I offer only an anecdotal observation, but my evening walks around town are now accompanied by a dank potpourri of…

That's evidence of increased public/open-air consumption, which is to be expected with legalization Don't need to hide it anymore, especially if the local police don't have much to do otherwise

>That's evidence of increased public/open-air consumption, which is to be expected with legalization

>Don't need to hide it anymore, especially if the local police don't have much to do otherwise

Yep. At least in New York City before legalization, using cannabis in public earned you an arrest and a night in jail despite the fact that it wasn't even a misdemeanor, just a local code violation with a $50 fine.

That was done consistently (I know several folks who were caught up in such chicanery) for decades to deter folks from using in public.

But enforcement was spotty and, as usual, melanin content played an outsized role in determining who would be "enforced."

Thank goodness that's not happening anymore.

Edit: Fixed prose ('we' --> 'were')>

Post reply on HN