The cellphone paradox - where are all the accidents?

:)

I agree that the accident RATE is what's important. Not number of accidents, nor injuries or fatalities.

The first order problem is simply the accident rate. Any good data that focuses objectively on the accident RATE is good data.

+42

I don't need someone chatting in my ear to "keep me company".

You can't discuss anything *important* or *significant* (business contracts, etc.) as you can't "take notes" (do you really think you can drive a car, sort out details of a contract that has real dollars/consequences *and* keep all of that in your head until you find a place where you can commit it to paper?)

How sure are you that the party you want to speak with will be available? If they are not, will you sit in your car, in the garage, until they BECOME available??

Are you always *alone* in your vehicle? If not, do you still avail yourself of the phone contact to the detriment of your fellow passengers? (I'd much rather talk with someone seated beside me than some faceless entity on the end of an invisible wire)

Do you limit your phone call to the length of your travels? If you arrive at your destination, do you terminate the call? Or, sit in your car (apparently) "talking to yourself"?

What are you discussing that is *so* important that it can't wait until you're someplace more conducive to FULLY ENGAGED conversation?

You can also watch the road and surroundings: ah, road work scheduled, here, next week! I'd best keep that in mind!

More to the point, are there that many people that want to talk to *you*?!

We had a neighbor who had a phone glued to her ear every moment that you saw her. A stay-at-home mom (who was always running around "shopping"). You *know* she was just flapping her jaw; nothing of "value" coming out (at least *most* of the time).

Some people just hate the sound of silence!

mercy!

Except for the point oak or ivy part, it all sounds pretty rough but fun for the major hiker.

Don't stop talking, pls. It's nice to have an INTERESTING discussion. Thanks!

Yeah, it's something like 50 calories per *tablespoon*! The distressing thing is that I *lose* weight when I eat it! :-/ You gotta know something horribly wrong is happening in my body at that time!

You're probably a carbohydrate addict and lose weight if you eat carbs at certain times of the day. NO FAIR!

It's mostly *fat* -- heavy cream and butter. OK, there's some sugar in there, too.

I suspect what happens is I eat nothing *but* ice cream during these periods (binges?). And, it's so rich that I don't consume enough to make up for all the other stuff that I am *not* eating.

At least, that's what I *hope* is happening!

lol Well, if you can do it w/o gaining weight, enjoy it!

Unfortunately, you can't hike off trail in these mountains without running into poison oak by the hundreds of yards. It's just part of nature.

Maybe that's why I don't run into anyone texting-while-hiking out here?

I have to agree.

If the studies are even slightly valid, then the accident rate

*has* to go up the more people *use* cellphones.

That the rate isn't going up is the paradox.

The only solutions to the paradox that have been proposed are either that the rate isn't going up, or that something else is masking the rate.

The "things" suggested to mask the rate must exactly cancel out the rate (both in rate and timing) for them to make any logical sense.

Such "things" suggested, to date, are, as I recall:

1. Drunk driving enforcement exactly canceling out the rates
2. Errors in the rate figures exactly canceling out the rates
3. Safety improvements of vehicles & roadways canceling the rates
4. Safety advantages of cellphones exactly outweighing distractions
5. Cellphone laws themselves preventing cellphone usage
6. Voluntary non-usage of the cellphones that are owned

Did I miss any?

If I say 'OK Google' I can apparently get something Siri-like. I've tried "Call Bob", and that indeed calls up the phone and Bob's number, but I think I have to tap something at that point. I also said "Find Costco" and ultimately google maps came up. I should really spend some time playing with it...

It has to be something that doesn't require too much attention, but it has to be words. I like music, but I need words to avoid worrying about shit. When I was riding my motorcycle I spent the first half hour with the words "...and then a wheel came off..." rolling around in my mind as I kept trying to tell myself that YES I CHECKED THE WIRES ON THE NUTS BEFORE WE LEFT...

I'm retired. Long ago (1994, maybe) I was driving my boss' car to a customer's place on Mountain Street. Little did I know that there were THREE Mountain Streets in the area. I used his car phone to call him and chew him out for not telling me which one he meant. He was a really good boss. Like my other really good boss, he quit 2 years after hiring me because he had a really bad boss, who then became MY bad boss.

They are widely reported in the US newspapers.

It didn't take long on Google to find headlines along the lines of 25% of US car crashes occur when people are on their cell phone. eg.

Claiming that mobile phones caused them is a bit too strong but they were almost certainly a factor. The simulator results back this up. A second distraction at 50mph means you have travelled another 22m.

There are studies that claim no effect or about 4x more likely to have a crash but I can't find the raw data online to check it. eg.

I am afraid my reference is merely "I read the report in a reasonably reputable science magazine many years ago". I would like to be able to give you something better here, but that's it.

The study was done with test subjects on driving simulators which gave sudden emergency situations - something like a virtual kid running out from behind a virtual ice-cream van and counting how many people hit the kid. They got people to come in with their families, who were told to fight in the back of the simulator. They woke up volunteers at 3 in the morning to test driving skills while tired, and so on.

I believe the "winner" of the worst distraction while driving was eating a packet of crisps.

Another point of interest was that drunk driving was not a problem for Australian farmers - they were so used to driving long distances back from the nearest pub that they could do it safely. It's the person who drives drunk /once/ that is most dangerous.

I also read a report (with a similar reference) that had found that the average overtaking on roads in the UK led to a seven second reduction in journey time. So while it might make sense to overtake a tractor or something, before you overtake that lorry or caravan you should think "what I am going to do with these extra 7 seconds that makes this worth the risk?".

I'v also tried writing notes for service calls, while driving. I'm with you, writing takes a LOT of brain RAM. I've not tried a small recorder, but that should be considerable safer. I can drive and talk on a CB or amateur radio and still be focussed on the road.

The one or two times I tried texting (many years ago) I could feel the lack of concentration on my driving.

Some years ago, there was a fellow whose steering shaft broke. The steering wheel and the steering gear box were not connected to each other. But the rest of the car was in good shape. The mechanic thoughtrfully said he could weld a piece of metal to the shaft, and the guy could steer with his knees, pushing the piece of metal left and right, to rotate the steering shaft. It would take some getting used to, but it would work. The customer said fine, and just leave the existing steering wheel in place.

The driver and owner of the car had a lot of fun with that. he'd offer someone a ride. He would pretend to be sleepy, or drunk. Steering with his knees (hands on the wheel) he'd have a couple near miss, off parked cars, or off another moving vehicle.

Eventually the pasenger would ask if he was OK.

The drriver owner would then reply, no, I'm really in no condition to drive. You take the wheel!

(and would then pull the steering wheel off, and hand it to the passenger.)

Per Ashton Crusher:

Middle-aged cop... definitely not new on the job.

yeah, that's what google inc. says. :)