- #1
yourdadonapogostick
- 270
- 1
driving while drunk is safer than driving while talking on a cell phone, according to Mythbusters.
Driving while drunk is safer than driving while talking on a cell phon
- Thread starter yourdadonapogostick
- Start date
-
- Tags
- Cell
Click For Summary
Discussion Overview
The discussion revolves around the claim that driving while drunk is safer than driving while talking on a cell phone. Participants explore this assertion through references to experiments, statistics, and personal experiences, touching on the implications for road safety and driver behavior.
Discussion Character
- Debate/contested
- Exploratory
- Technical explanation
- Conceptual clarification
Main Points Raised
- Some participants reference a Mythbusters episode suggesting that driving while drunk may be safer than driving while on a cell phone.
- Others challenge the validity of the statistics and experiments cited, suggesting they may be misleading.
- One participant describes an experiment where drivers performed poorly both while drunk and on a cell phone, but better while drunk than on a cell phone.
- Concerns are raised about the variability in levels of drunkenness and how it affects driving ability compared to the distraction of a phone call.
- Some participants argue that many drivers may be more willing to drive while talking on a phone than while drunk, potentially skewing accident statistics.
- Questions are posed regarding the methodology of the Mythbusters test, including the criteria for testing and the conditions under which participants were evaluated.
- One participant suggests that a more comprehensive study is needed, involving a larger and more diverse sample size to draw valid conclusions.
- Another participant shares a personal anecdote about driving while drunk, indicating a willingness to engage in risky behavior under certain conditions.
- Some express skepticism about the reliability of the Mythbusters findings and the potential for altered behavior due to awareness of being tested.
- A participant mentions a study indicating that drivers at a blood alcohol level of around .08 may be "safer" than those on a cell phone, citing erratic behaviors of phone users.
Areas of Agreement / Disagreement
Participants do not reach a consensus on the claim that driving while drunk is safer than driving while talking on a cell phone. Multiple competing views remain, with some supporting the claim and others challenging its validity.
Contextual Notes
Limitations in the discussion include the lack of clarity on the specific conditions of the Mythbusters experiment, the variability in individual responses to alcohol, and the need for a multivariable analysis to assess the impact of both distractions accurately.
- #2
Knavish
- 117
- 1
And according to some misleading statistics...
- #3
yourdadonapogostick
- 270
- 1
this was determined my experiment. they had people do a road test and had them take it on a cell phone and had them take it drunk. they failed on both the cell phone one and the drunk one, but they did better when drunk than while on a cell phone.
- #4
brewnog
Science Advisor
Gold Member
- 2,751
- 8
This is just stupid. I'm not even going to justify myself.
- #5
yourdadonapogostick
- 270
- 1
what is stupid about it?
- #6
Andy
- 76
- 14
How drunk where they? Drunkeness is on a scale, whereas talking on a phone is just stupid, although i admit i have driven whilst talking on a phone and i have driven whilst drunk (only in a very large completely deserted carpark with a mate in the passenger seat) And to be honest driving and talking on the phone isn't to much of a problem aslong as you remember to keep your distance from the car infront and if you know the layout of the road.
- #7
Pengwuino
Gold Member
- 5,112
- 20
I bet the claim is true. I think they did a count last year in my city that showed more accidents involved 1 or more parties on the cell phone then accidents where 1 or more parites were drunk. But then again people in my city are absolutely stupid when it comes to driving and are cell-phone obsessed.
- #8
yourdadonapogostick
- 270
- 1
iirc, bal was right below the legal limit.
Last edited:
- #9
Townsend
- 240
- 0
yourdadonapogostick said:
Well there you go...now get them hammered and do the experiment again.
- #10
brewnog
Science Advisor
Gold Member
- 2,751
- 8
Being a "drunk driver" can range from someone having had half a pint in the pub with their dinner at lunchtime, to being absolutely twatted. While talking on the phone provides a distraction, it does not directly affect reaction times or judgement. Give someone 10 pints, and I would bet my right bollock that my little sister could drive better than them, on the phone.
Pengwuino, I suspect that far many more drivers are prepared to drive whilst talking on the phone, than drunk. This would explain the numbers in your city.
In addition, I do not believe the mythbusters test to be trustworthy. I'm assuming that the participants had been briefed on what they were actually doing? What criteria were they tested on? Reaction times? Maintaining control of the vehicle?
Given the choice, I'd much rather step off the pavement into the path of a driver who was talking on their phone, than someone who had drunk as little as 2 pints.
Pengwuino, I suspect that far many more drivers are prepared to drive whilst talking on the phone, than drunk. This would explain the numbers in your city.
In addition, I do not believe the mythbusters test to be trustworthy. I'm assuming that the participants had been briefed on what they were actually doing? What criteria were they tested on? Reaction times? Maintaining control of the vehicle?
Given the choice, I'd much rather step off the pavement into the path of a driver who was talking on their phone, than someone who had drunk as little as 2 pints.
Last edited:
- #11
yourdadonapogostick
- 270
- 1
it was the actual test to get a license.
what is untrustworthy about mythbusters?
what is untrustworthy about mythbusters?
- #12
cronxeh
Gold Member
- 1,006
- 11
You need a multivariable analysis for an experiment to even be valid:
1. Drunk test: Blood Alcohol Level? How many different obstacle tests? How does it vary with BAL? How many sensors are impared?
2. Cell test: One hand? Which hand? Hands free? What if you are holding a cell phone and dialing it, looking at it - thus imparing 2 senses
3. Drunk AND on Cell phone - How does it compare to either test? What is the percentage of failure on either obstacle test?
Now perform this experiment with about a 100 individuals, and with different medical conditions, age groups, genders, and race, and then we can somewhat conclude, with a significant margin of error, that either talking on the cellphone or driving drunk is worse
1. Drunk test: Blood Alcohol Level? How many different obstacle tests? How does it vary with BAL? How many sensors are impared?
2. Cell test: One hand? Which hand? Hands free? What if you are holding a cell phone and dialing it, looking at it - thus imparing 2 senses
3. Drunk AND on Cell phone - How does it compare to either test? What is the percentage of failure on either obstacle test?
Now perform this experiment with about a 100 individuals, and with different medical conditions, age groups, genders, and race, and then we can somewhat conclude, with a significant margin of error, that either talking on the cellphone or driving drunk is worse
- #13
Andy
- 76
- 14
On the phone whilst drunk, i'll have to give that one a go i could imagine that one being most damaging. I can remember having to drive my car about 200 metres from outside my friends house to the parking around the back off it. I was soo drunk i had to close one eye to see where i was going. BUT I WOULD NEVER HAVE DONE IT IF IT WASNT SUCH A SHORT DISTANCE AND IF I WASNT GONNA GET CLAMPED AND FINED SEVERAL HUNDRED POUNDS FOR LEAVING IT WHERE IT WAS.
just thought i would add that.
just thought i would add that.
- #14
brewnog
Science Advisor
Gold Member
- 2,751
- 8
yourdadonapogostick said:
I have absolutely no idea, never seen it.
- #15
Artman
- 1,507
- 40
And for God's sake don't use your cell phone while driving drunk!
I think Brewnog and Cronxeh are on the right track here. If the person knows they are being tested, they will react differently then if they are not aware they are being tested. Same for both conditions, drunk or phoning. This could alter behavior enough to invalidate any results. In fact both could be far worse then testing would indicate.
I think Brewnog and Cronxeh are on the right track here. If the person knows they are being tested, they will react differently then if they are not aware they are being tested. Same for both conditions, drunk or phoning. This could alter behavior enough to invalidate any results. In fact both could be far worse then testing would indicate.
- #16
yourdadonapogostick
- 270
- 1
how would you go about testing people without them knowing?
- #17
iansmith
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
- 1,317
- 2
There is an actually study that demonstrated that drivers that were under the influence of alcohol (around .08) are "safer" than drivers having a cell phone conversation.
http://www.cts.umn.edu/news/report/2005/06/cellphones.html
From experience, people having a cell phone conversation while are dangerous especially in large city with dense circulation. They often erratic behavior (i.e. break for no reason, slow down, speed up, etc). The only thing that limit accident is that people around are paying attention to the road and it is daylight.
http://www.cts.umn.edu/news/report/2005/06/cellphones.html
From experience, people having a cell phone conversation while are dangerous especially in large city with dense circulation. They often erratic behavior (i.e. break for no reason, slow down, speed up, etc). The only thing that limit accident is that people around are paying attention to the road and it is daylight.
Last edited by a moderator:
- #18
Mk
- 2,040
- 4
We all knew that, its just... sometimes... you can trust the Canadians!