As I'm not fond of "wasting time" on eating (and, by extension, *cooking*), I make things in large batches, freeze it and live off the "leftovers" (even though they technically aren't left OVER!).
E.g., I make 16q of marinara sauce at a time; 8 pounds of meatloaf (slice and individually wrap each slice prior to freezing); a large pork shoulder (shred/pull and put in small "single serving" bags); etc.
In this way, I can pull something from the freezer, toss it in the microwave and be eating a "meal" three or four minutes later.
I am "strongly discouraged" from making ice cream. SWMBO shouldn't be eating it -- yet has a hard time resisting! Ditto for the cheesecake. The notable exception, there, is you can't "sneak" a piece of cheesecake without it being noticed (by whomever the cheesecake is destined). So, that tends to discourage "cheating".
The same argument holds for coffee cake.
OTOH, you can eat a good portion of a batch of ice cream and no one is the wiser! "That's all he made!" Likewise, brownies, cookies, etc. can disappear in large numbers without anyone being the wiser! :>
I've seen it and it's just as annoying. Sometimes I'm worried that an entire generation is being raised that demands instant gratification and thinks nothing of how what they're doing affects others.
I USED to do stuff like that when the kids were still at home, but I just don't eat that much. My husband will cook his lunch meals ahead of time and freeze them.
I've been working towards making a healthier version of ice cream, and so far, so good (and yummy, too!).
If it worked, it would be really nice but mine disable all of the other smart phone features (e.g. navi) when paired, so I don't pair them to the radios.
Yep. Bad plan all around. The commercials asking what you do when watching a football game and the phone rings (you can't do both) are right on.
I ride a *lot* - but would never, ever recommend it to anybody else.
The core of my being able to feel reasonably not-in-danger is avoiding proximity with motor vehicles. But that leads one into behavior that is largely illegal, probably does not scale, and depends on an continuous series of decisions.
When I was younger (back when the dinosaurs ruled Urth), I used to regularly make a 25 mi ride to school, in traffic. Never had any problems (but, then again, my body could do more things than it can, now!). But, even the highways that I rode on were just 2 or 4 lanes. And that's passing through 4 or 5 towns!
Here, the roads in *town* are 4 and 6 lanes. And the drivers tend to all think their urgency is the utmost! Heaven forbid they leave home 3 minutes sooner so they wouldn't have to try to make up that *3* minutes on the road!
Most places, here, require you to drive *on* the road. No sidewalks to exploit (driving on sidewalks is illegal -- even if they existed).
When I walk up to the local library, the first ~1/2 mile I can cheat and cut through the wash -- no traffic. But, thereafter, I walk along the side of a 4 lane, 50MPH road (not "highway"). No sidewalks. So, I walk *well* up on the grass, facing traffic. And, still must remain vigilant that someone doesn't drift off the road and run me over (it's not uncommon -- a young woman was run over while walking he child in a stroller... a young kid busy changing radio stations instead of watching the road)
Actually, it's not the "youngsters" (college and teens) but, rather, the generation *before* (late 20's to 30ish) that are the biggest offenders. I would have thought that library's were still "quiet" when they were growing up (?) so can't understand why they feel like they can "hold court" in the middle of the reading area -- while their kids run around unattended!
The same seems true of the folks who race through the neighborhood; not the youngsters but, rather, the soccer moms/dads that can't adequately manage their time/schedules and, as a result, are always "late" (and trying to make up lost time by driving 10 or 20 MPH above the speed limit -- for the THREE BLOCKS between here and the stop sign!
But, the "next generation" is always The Pits, eh? :>
I agree with pretty much all you wrote just before this. We simply don't have the data to sort out the truth. And as a result we have the paradox. It seems to me too things are true but this is just my opinion...
1) Cell phone use can be distracting and distractions can cause accidents.
2) The hysteria of cell phone use is unwarranted. Whatever level of distraction and accidents result is very little different, in the totality of actual distractions for all causes, then things were before cell phones. So more or less, for every cell phone caused accident there is on less CD changing caused accident. I'm sure it's not really a 1:1 ratio but it's close enough that the hysteria is unwarranted.
Beyond that though I think there is a real difference between "using a cell phone" as in placing or receiving a call and talking AND texting. Texting simply takes too much mental processing for too long a time to be safe. And I think some studies point to that difference. I used to inspect roads and trying to write down on paper, which was similar to texting, the info I was gathering as I drove down the road was just way too distracting to be safe. But dictating it into a small micro-recorder worked just fine and I could keep my eyes on the road and immediately react if anything popped up. I'd play it back at the office and make the notes.
The other issue is that for every alleged accident caused by someone "using a cell phone" there may have been 20 million similar "hazardous events that could have caused an accident" where the driver was using a cell phone and DIDN'T have an accident.
No doubt it is when you are new to the job. Then you learn how to do it safely, or at least as safe as it can be done. I posted at length about this somewhere in this thread.
The problem I see is that the conclusion is absurd. The CLAIM that the accidents were caused by the cell phones is mostly likely just happenstance. A cell phone was in use THEREFORE the cell phone MUST have caused the accident. Well, the brakes were in use too, should we say the brakes caused the accident? Ditto for the headlights for nighttime accidents. You know every cop is itching to check the box or write the comment that "cell phone contributed" because cell phones are today's demon. It's like how when someone has a single car accident and they can't come up with a reason they check the box for "speed related" because... Hey, he must have been going to fast! He had an accident!!.
What would I use it for? I rately want to talk to people on the phone, I'd much rather send email -- which I do from my computer because typing on a real keyboard is just SOOOO much easier than bumbling along on the phone's 'keyboard'. There's a cd player in the car, on which I listen to the radio or audiobooks on trips of half an hour or more -- I've been working on a Tom Clancy for a couple of years now; you don't have to remember the plot, you can just pick it up whenever it's handy :-) It's easier to use the Garmin GPS, especially since reading small print is a real bitch and I mostly know where I want to go anyway.
So what DO you use yours for? Do you have that many people you want to talk to? Scary...
Lots of good reading there, so thanks for the links. It will take me a while to go through it, but for others, here's the list of "stuff" that is on that page.
I'm first going to look for effects on "accident rates" in the USA, which is the key focus of this thread.
Meta-Analyses & Literature Reviews These papers compile the findings of many studies, which is convenient to get an overview of the issue:
Is a hands-free phone safer than a handheld phone? Ishigami & Klein. (2009). Journal of Safety Research. 40; 157?164.
Analysis of the Literature: The Use of Mobile Phones While Driving Brace, Young & Regan. (2007). Monash University Research Centre.
Cell phones and driving: review of research McCartt, Hellinga, Braitman. (2006). Traffic Injury Prevention. 7; 89-106.
A meta-analysis of driving performance and crash risk associated with the use of cellular telephones while driving Caird, et al. (2005). Department of Psychology University of Calgary, Honeywell, Human Factors North. PROCEEDINGS of the Third International Driving Symposium on Human Factors in Driver Assessment, Training and Vehicle Design. 478-485.
The Impact of Cell Phone Conversations on Driving, A Meta-Analytic Approach Horrey & Wickens. (2004). Technical Report. University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.
Effects of Cellular Telephones on Driving Behaviour and Crash Risk: Results of Meta Analysis Caird, et al. (2004). CAA Foundation for Traffic Safety.
Crash Risk & Crash Data Young Drivers Report the Highest Level of Phone Involvement in Crash or Near-Crash Incidences National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. (2012). Traffic Safety Facts Research Note.
2010 Motor Vehicle Crashes: Overview National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. (2011). Traffic Safety Facts Research Note. NOTE: Beginning with 2010 data, NHTSA is using a new measure of distracted driving crashes. The new definiti?on is more narrow, intended to focus on distractions most likely to affect crash involvement. Thus 2010 distraction numbers cannot be compared to previous years.
Distracted Driving 2009 National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. (2010). Traffic Safety Facts Research Note.
Trends in Fatalities From Distracted Driving in the United States, 1999 to 2008 Wilson. (2010). American Journal of Public Health. 100(11):2213-2219.
Role of mobile phones in motor vehicle crashes resulting in hospital attendance: a case-crossover study McEvoy, et al. (2005). BMJ. 331(7514):428
The role of driver distraction in traffic crashes Stutts, et al. (2001). AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety
Cellular Phone Use While Driving: Risks and Benefits Lissy, et al. (2000). Harvard Center for Risk Analysis. Phase 1 Report.
Crashes Induced by Driver Information Systems and What Can Be Done to Reduce Them Green. (2000). University of Michigan Transportation Research Institute.
Association between cellular telephone calls and motor vehicle collisions Redelmeier & Tibshirani. (1997). New England Journal of Medicine, 336; 453-458. ?
Hands-Free Devices This NSC white paper includes an extensive bibliography of research studies about cognitive distraction and hands-free phone conversation while driving:
?Understanding the distracted brain: Why driving while using hands-free phones is risky behavior White paper. (2010). National Safety Council.
Cognitive Distraction Research This NSC white paper includes an extensive bibliography of research studies about cognitive distraction and phone conversation while driving:
Understanding the distracted brain: Why driving while using hands-free phones is risky behavior White paper. (2010). National Safety Council.
Measuring Cognitive Distraction in the Automobile. AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety. June 2013.
Text Messaging and Voice-Activated Texting Research listed here about manual texting and speech-to-text systems:
?New research reveals that voice-activated in-car technologies dangerously undermine driver attention. AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety. 2013.
Voice-to-Text Driver Distraction Study. New research findings suggest that voice-to-text applications offer no real safety advantage over manual texting. Texas A&M Transportation Institute. 2013.
The Effect of Text Messaging on Driver Behavior: A Simulator Study Reed & Robbins. (2008). Published Project Report PPR 367. Transport Research Laboratory.
The effects of text messaging on young novice driver performance Hosking, Young & Regan. (2006). Report No. 246. Monash University Accident Research Centre.
Cell Phones Compared to Alcohol Impaired Driving This study examined cell phone use while driving as well as alcohol-impaired driving:
?Fatal Distraction? A Comparison of the Cell Phone Driver and the Drunk Driver Strayer, Drews, Crouch. (2006). Human Factors. 48(2);381-391.
Driver Cell Phone Use Rates These studies estimate how many drivers are using cell phones, through direct observation of drivers in traffic, self-report surveys or other methods:
?Driver Electronic Device Use in 2012 National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. (2014). Traffic Safety Facts Research Note.
Driver Electronic Device Use in 2011 National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. (2013). Traffic Safety Facts Research Note.
Driver Electronic Device Use in 2010 National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. (2011). Traffic Safety Facts Research Note.
Evaluations of Laws & Enforcement These studies examine the effectiveness of laws and enforcement:
High-Visibility Enforcement Demonstration Programs in Connecticut and New York Reduce Hand-Held Phone Use National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. (2010). Traffic Safety Facts Research Note.
Phoning While Driving Insurance Institute for Highway Safety. (2010). Status Report.
Longer-term effects of Washington, DC, law on drivers hand-held cell phone use McCartt & Hellinga. (2007). Traffic Injury Prevention. 8(2):199-204.
Effects of Washington, D.C. law on drivers hand-held cell phone use McCartt, Hellinga, Geary. (2006). Traffic Injury Prevention. 7(1):1-5.
Longer term effects of New York State's law on drivers handheld cell phone use McCartt & Geary. (2004). Injury Prevention. 10(1):11-5.
Drivers use of handheld cell phones before and after New York State's cell phone law McCartt, Braver, Geary. (2003). Prevention Medicine. 36(5):629-35. ?
Teens & Young Drivers Studies that focused on teens, novice drivers and young adults:
Young Drivers Report the Highest Level of Phone Involvement in Crash or Near-Crash Incidences National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. (2012). Traffic Safety Facts Research Note.
Distracted Driving Among Newly Licensed Teen Drivers AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety. (2012).
Teens and Distracted Driving: Texting, talking and other uses of the cell phone behind the wheel Madden & Lenhart. (2009). Pew Internet & American Life Project.
Public Opinion Surveys ?Surveys have measured public support for hands-free, handheld and texting bans. Surveys also offer insight into driver attitudes, beliefs and behaviors:
2013 Traffic Safety Culture Index AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety, 2013.
National Distracted Driving Telephone Survey Finds Most Drivers Answer the Call, Hold the Phone, and Continue to Drive National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. (2011). Traffic Tech.
National Phone Survey on Distracted Driving Attitudes and Behaviors Tison, Chaudhary & Cosgrove. (2011). National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. More research reports and analysis on distracted driving, cell phones & car crashes:
National Phone Survey on Distracted Driving Attitudes and Behaviors Tison, Chaudhary & ; Cosgrove. (2011). National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
National Distracted Driving Telephone Survey Finds Most Drivers Answer the Call, Hold the Phone, and Continue to Drive National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. (2011). Traffic Tech.
Distracted Driving and Driver, Roadway and Environmental Factors Singh. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. (2010). Technical Report. DOT HS 811 380.
Cell Phones and Driving: Research Update AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety. (2008).
The Impact of Driver Inattention on Near-Crash/Crash Risk: An Analysis Using the 100-Car Naturalistic Driving Study Data Klauer, et al. (2006). National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. Technical Report. DOT HS 810 594.
Effects of Simulator Practice and Real-World Experience on Cell-Phone?Related Driver Distraction Cooper & Strayer. (2008). Human Factors. 50(6): 893?902.
Mobile telephone simulator study Kircher, et al. (2004). Swedish National Road and Transport Research Institute.
NHTSA Status Summary: Using Wireless Communication Devices While Driving National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. (2003). Obtained via Freedom of Information Act and published by the New York Times.
Distractions in Everyday Driving Stutts, et al. (2003). University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill Highway Safety Research Center, AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety.
The Use of Mobile Phones in Road Traffic, SNRA inquiry into the use of mobile phones and other IT systems while driving Patten, et al. (2003). Swedish National Road Administration.
Predicting the effects of in-car interface use on driver performance: an integrated model approach Salvucci. (2001). International Journal of Human-Computer Studies. 55, 85:107.
Cell Phone Use Monteressi. ExxonMobil Biomedical Sciences Inc.
In keeping with Occam's Razer (otherwise known as KISS); this is the simplest of the six solutions proposed to date that satisfy the solution to the paradox.
That simples solution to the paradox is simply that the accident rate is wholly unaffected by cellphone usage.
But everyone wants a more complicated solution, such as the whacko who proposes (seriously, I think) that the minor errors in the accident statistics exactly cancel out the stupifyingly huge cellphone ownership numbers, or the proponents who seriously suggested that drunk driving enforcement exactly cancelled out the same, for the exact same result.
These solutions, while possible, are so highly improbably compared to the Occam's Razer solution, that four or five of the six solutions proposed can pretty much be considered frivolous right off the bat.
And in what percent of accidents were the drivers holding the steering wheel? If we could only take those steering wheels out of cars the accident rates would plummet.
Where I go hiking, I almost never run into people, period.
formatting link
But, as Jeff knows, I live in the Santa Cruz mountains, where there are plenty of off trail ways to get around, since the loggers bulldozed trails all over the hills a hundred years ago (which I specialize in following).
formatting link
Most of these logging roads washed out in the ravines about fifty years ago, and the cliff hangers all fell into the valleys - but they're still navigable on foot.
formatting link
So, a lot has to do with *where* you're hiking, since I think I never once ran into anyone on the trail, in the past five years of weekly hikes in the hills (we use rope to get across the ravines, so these aren't hikes for little old ladies).
formatting link
Here are some pictures of an easy cross just last week for example.
formatting link
PS: The black splotches on the gloves and clothes is poison oak, which is called "urushiol", which basically means black lacquer in Japanese origins. If you don't have black splotches all over your clothes, then you haven't been in poison oak or ivy.
And did you note that they did NOT talk about rates. The amount of miles people drive varies from year to year. It's very likely that the miles driven went up because
1) employment and the economy improved slightly
2) the price of gas dropped quite a bit.
As a result of miles driven going up, and all other things remaining the same such as how safely people drive, the NUMBER of accidents WILL go up, even thought in actuality, nothing has changed in the safety sphere.
I've see that same ploy by the safety Nazi's time after time. Whenever they need a headline they discover that the total number of accidents/fatalities/spilled hot coffee has increased while completely ignoring the actual RATEs, which are the ONLY way to even begin to make meaningful comparisons on these questions.
Whatever will get them the headlines is what the put in their press release whether it's meaningful or not.
MotorsForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.