Drink as a driving aid
Robert Henderson
Drink relaxes jumpy Irish drivers, MP says
Tue Oct 27, 2009 11:12am GMT
�
DUBLIN (Reuters) - A politician from Ireland's governing party has said
"jumpy" drivers might benefit from having a relaxing alcoholic drink to
steady their nerves.
Note: Approximately one fifth of deaths on the roads are caused by
vehicles driven by someone over the limit. That of course is not the
same as saying the drink caused those 20% of deaths. It also means that
80% of deaths are caused by drivers below the limit.
It would be very interesting to see a comparison of deaths over the 40
years ago since the Breathalyser was introduced. I rather suspect that
percentage would remain reasonably stable. If so, the drop in deaths
would be the result of seat-belts and the vast improvement of crash
safety measures in vehicles. RH
--
Robert Henderson
Personal website: http://www.anywhere.demon.co.uk
Adrian
much like they were saying:
> Drink relaxes jumpy Irish drivers, MP says Tue Oct 27, 2009 11:12am GMT
>
> DUBLIN (Reuters) - A politician from Ireland's governing party has said
> "jumpy" drivers might benefit from having a relaxing alcoholic drink to
> steady their nerves.
>
> Note: Approximately one fifth of deaths on the roads are caused by
> vehicles driven by someone over the limit. That of course is not the
> same as saying the drink caused those 20% of deaths. It also means that
> 80% of deaths are caused by drivers below the limit.
Nor, of course, is "a relaxing alcoholic drink" the same as "over the
limit"...
PeterG
wrote:
20% of accidents caused by drunks.
Ban all those sober drivers, they cause 80% of the accidents.
Accident figures would go down at once.
PeterG
Jon°
In the day when most drivers were sensible people, both cars and lorry
drivers, the odd drink didn’t matter too much. A chap on the way home
may have stopped for a quickie and been perfectly OK to drive after
half an hours relaxation.
In these wonderful modern times we live in now though, at least 50% of
the cars on the roads are driven by mad-headed kids who would not have
been able to afford a car in previous generations. These type of boy-
racers cannot only not control their driving, they can’t control their
drinking either……..So I reckon that it is correct for the law to be
hard on people who drink and drive…….Nowadays.
Sadly, we all have to suffer for the mindless few.
Lou Ravi
IIRC deaths on the road have dropped considerably since then despite a
greater number of cars in operation (though this might help by reducing
average speed) but as you suggest, it would be hard to separate the
limits on 'drink-driving( from the imporvements in cars, their safety,
seat belts and the state of the roads.
Ah yes, here we are for the number since 1967
http://www.statistics.gov.uk/cci/nugget.asp?id=1208
Nick 'my dad (correction) didnt fly spitfires' Griffin
....and here you are....
Ivan
"The UK has a good record for road safety compared with most other EU
countries. In 2006 it had one of the lowest road death rates in the EU"..
AIUI despite us having a higher drink drive limit to most other European
countries.
Fredxx
"Ivan" <ivan'H'ol...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:hcchp3$q2j$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
Most other EU countries don't give a 1 year ban and a 10 year endorsement.
Most treat it like a minor speeding offence.
Cynic
<phi...@anywhere.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>DUBLIN (Reuters) - A politician from Ireland's governing party has said
>"jumpy" drivers might benefit from having a relaxing alcoholic drink to
>steady their nerves.
I can believe that.
Anyone who is appearing on TV or radio for the first time, or making
any other uncustomary public appearance is well advised to have one or
two (but certainly no more) stiff drinks beforehand.
--
Cynic
Ste
wrote:
> Drink relaxes jumpy Irish drivers, MP says
> Tue Oct 27, 2009 11:12am GMT
>
> DUBLIN (Reuters) - A politician from Ireland's governing party has said
> "jumpy" drivers might benefit from having a relaxing alcoholic drink to
> steady their nerves.
Haha! That's the sort of politician that I like - the one's whose
public statements correspond with their private beliefs.
> Note: Approximately one fifth of deaths on the roads are caused by
> vehicles driven by someone over the limit. That of course is not the
> same as saying the drink caused those 20% of deaths. It also means that
> 80% of deaths are caused by drivers below the limit.
>
> It would be very interesting to see a comparison of deaths over the 40
> years ago since the Breathalyser was introduced. I rather suspect that
> percentage would remain reasonably stable. If so, the drop in deaths
> would be the result of seat-belts and the vast improvement of crash
> safety measures in vehicles. RH
The reality is that studies have shown that a moderate amount of drink
actually increases the average driver's performance and reaction
times.
Lou Ravi
> "Ivan" <ivan'H'ol...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:hcchp3$q2j$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
>> "The UK has a good record for road safety compared with most other EU
>> countries. In 2006 it had one of the lowest road death rates in the
>> EU".. AIUI despite us having a higher drink drive limit to most
>> other European countries.
>>
>
> Most other EU countries don't give a 1 year ban and a 10 year
> endorsement. Most treat it like a minor speeding offence.
Well as Ivan says, the limit is higher in the UK (as far as i know) 0.8
to 0.5 in France (at least). As for the ban, yes, they are more gentle
here (in France) than in the UK *the first time* but repeat offenders
really get rapped on the knuckles and often get a prison sentence and
even a withdrawal of their licence, requiring them to repass the test
(and even that is sometimes disallowed for a certain while).
yitzhak in eretz isreal (sic)
Once again proving that not only is a little knowledge a dangerous thing,
but a wannabe Frenchman is a twat. The limit in France is 0.5 but also
0.8. 0.5 is a 'contravention', and 0.8 and above is a 'délit'.
I suggest you ask a real French person next time, Johnny-Boy, to avoid
looking like such a twat.
Y.
--
Yitzhak Isaac Goldstein
AADP's 'left-wing Israeli intellectual'
'The same folks that are bombing innocent people in Iraq were the ones
who attacked us in America on September the 11th'
(George W. Bush, 12 July 2007)
<http://elderofziyon.blogspot.com/>
allanbonnetracy
> Most other EU countries don't give a 1 year ban and a 10 year endorsement.
> Most treat it like a minor speeding offence.
>
In Germany, the penalties are not so severe and there are no bans as
such but earn enough points and you’re are disqualified from driving
until you’ve taken the driving course and test again.
It’s a minimum of twelve months to get through that (not to mention
the cost) and most drivers having had to go through all that, even
once, just to get to drive tend to be very very careful about having
it taken away.
allanbonnetracy
> Once again proving that not only is a little knowledge a dangerous thing,
> but a wannabe Frenchman is a twat. The limit in France is 0.5 but also
> 0.8. 0.5 is a 'contravention', and 0.8 and above is a 'délit'.
>
> I suggest you ask a real French person next time, Johnny-Boy, to avoid
> looking like such a twat.
>
Ah yes France, one of the first countries in the world to instigate a
smoking ban and currently one of the last countries in the world still
to get round to bothering their arses to enforce it or obey it.
The French don’t need drink-driving laws anyway, not when they always
drive sober as if they were already completely pissed.
My job takes me to Paris quite regularly and after a couple of Friday
evening taxi rides to the airport, like something from Death Race
2000, and the every 800 yard pile up (at least a blue light job) I
soon switched to the RER (train).
Lou Ravi
>> Once again proving that not only is a little knowledge a dangerous
>> thing, but a wannabe Frenchman is a twat. The limit in France is 0.5
>> but also
>>
>> I suggest you ask a real French person next time, Johnny-Boy, to
>> avoid looking like such a twat.
>>
>
> Ah yes France, one of the first countries in the world to instigate a
> smoking ban and currently one of the last countries in the world still
> to get round to bothering their arses to enforce it or obey it.
You're talking through your arse old son, the ban is in place and
respected far more than i would have expected. I live in France remeber,
i think i see a little more of it thatn youdo even if you do visit
occasionally perhaps.
>
> The French don�t need drink-driving laws anyway, not when they always
> drive sober as if they were already completely pissed.
Yes dear, now do try to grow up.
> My job takes me to Paris quite regularly and after a couple of Friday
> evening taxi rides to the airport, like something from Death Race
> 2000, and the every 800 yard pile up (at least a blue light job) I
> soon switched to the RER (train).
Utter bollocks. And by the way, Paris is not France.
yitzhak in eretz isreal (sic)
>>
>> Once again proving that not only is a little knowledge a dangerous thing,
>> but a wannabe Frenchman is a twat. The limit in France is 0.5 but also
>> 0.8. 0.5 is a 'contravention', and 0.8 and above is a 'délit'.
>>
>> I suggest you ask a real French person next time, Johnny-Boy, to avoid
>> looking like such a twat.
>>
>
> Ah yes France, one of the first countries in the world to instigate a
> smoking ban and currently one of the last countries in the world still
> to get round to bothering their arses to enforce it or obey it.
>
> drive sober as if they were already completely pissed.
>
> My job takes me to Paris quite regularly and after a couple of Friday
> evening taxi rides to the airport, like something from Death Race
> 2000, and the every 800 yard pile up (at least a blue light job) I
> soon switched to the RER (train).
I can only assume that you were in a Paris that is in a parallel universe,
then. I'm the first to admit that we're not the best drivers in the world,
but an accident every 800 yards? Come now ...
Robert Henderson
<b7f8d48a-adc7-45e5...@f20g2000prn.googlegroups.com>, Ste
<ste_...@hotmail.com> writes
>
>The reality is that studies have shown that a moderate amount of drink
>actually increases the average driver's performance and reaction times.
Got any references fro such research? RH
Mel Rowing
> The reality is that studies have shown that a moderate amount of drink
> actually increases the average driver's performance and reaction
> times.
You will find if you care to search the literature that any amount of
alcohol in one's system will adversely effect coordination, reaction
time and perhaps more importantly alertness all of which are crucial
capabilities when it comes to driving performance.
It is also the case that differences occur in these respects between
individuals all of whom have not partaken of alcohol over the past 24
hours or even are tee-total. Physiological state, tiredness, age,
emotional state are also factors that intrude in this respect.
One thing that always puzzles me regarding the alcohol limit, and I've
no wish to argue against it, is how it is set. Is it the case that
anyone over the limit performs significantly worse in the above
respects than everyone (or even nearly everyone) who drives and who's
blood alcohol level is at near zero?
I don't know.
Adrian
sounding much like they were saying:
> I suggest you ask a real French person next time, Johnny-Boy, to avoid
> looking like such a twat.
Would that "real French person" be a person of (AIUI) Scottish-Irish
origin living in Israel?
Robert Henderson
<ac9b5c7a-e59a-4cc9...@s31g2000yqs.googlegroups.com>, Mel
Rowing <mel.r...@btinternet.com> writes
>
>One thing that always puzzles me regarding the alcohol limit, and I've
>no wish to argue against it, is how it is set.
Probably the same as the official recommended drink maximums for men and
women: a medico was asked by the government what it should be and
pulled a figure out of the air. RH
>Is it the case that anyone over the limit performs significantly worse
>in the above respects than everyone (or even nearly everyone) who
>drives and who's blood alcohol level is at near zero?
>
>I don't know.
--
aaa
Like quite a few drugs, ethanol affects different people in different
ways and some people are more affected by the same ethanol level in
their blood than others.
For divers, it is known that different people will experience very
different affects from high Nitrogen levels (Nitrogen Narcosis), some
people are almost unaffected while others cannot think rationally and
others have suffered hallucinations.
Ste
wrote:
> In message
> <b7f8d48a-adc7-45e5-a620-9b9ade61c...@f20g2000prn.googlegroups.com>, Ste
> <ste_ro...@hotmail.com> writes
>
>
>
> >The reality is that studies have shown that a moderate amount of drink
> >actually increases the average driver's performance and reaction times.
>
> Got any references fro such research? RH
Acutally I don't have any to hand, and I don't want to be here all
night looking. But I can assure you that in the past I have seen
unequivocal research to exactly that effect.
A quick search however did also discover these (which should throw
doubt on people who say *any* alcohol is bad):
"Studies have shown that BAC levels as low as 0.04 gm/100 ml can
affect reaction times." (http://www.sci-ed-ga.org/modules/driving/
parts/appendixb.pdf)
And when they say "as low as", what they mean is that the limit is
80mg, and there is not *any* discernible effect on reaction times
until you reach at least half the limit, at 40mg.
Then we have (http://www.erso.eu/knowledge/content/05_alcohol/
effects_on_driver_capabilities.htm):
"Choice reaction time begin to deteriorate at a BAC of 0.6 g/l, and
for simple reaction time task the BAC is considerably higher before
significant prolonged reaction times appear"
In other words, according to this study, reaction times to complex
stimuli do not reduce *at all* until you reach 60mg. As for simple
stimuli, you have to be *even more drunk* before the alcohol has any
effect on your reactions.
"Reactions on a visual detection task (perception) when driving starts
to decrease significantly at a BAC of 0.8 g/l."
In other words, visual perception does not decrease significantly *at
all* until you're actually over the legal limit.
"Decrease in the ability to divide attention between the driving task
and another task starts at BACs between 0.3 and 1 g/l"
In other words, you can have a BAC level of 30mg, and you can still
afford to talk to the wife in the passenger seat with no adverse
effect on your driving.
And a more important point that such studies fail to address is the
question of *compensation*. Most people who have had a modest amount
to drink tend to compensate by driving substantially slower than their
normal speed, concentrate more, and perform fewer secondary tasks. In
the real world then (and outside of these laboratory studies), you
would expect drivers who have consumed a modest amount of drink to
actually drive safer, and overall pose a lesser risk.
And as the Irish politician says, if a stiff drink reduces anxiety and
distress, then one would expect to see more accurate judgments, a
lower preference for risk, and therefore safer drivers.
Ste
> On Oct 29, 6:17 pm, Ste <ste_ro...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > The reality is that studies have shown that a moderate amount of drink
> > actually increases the average driver's performance and reaction
> > times.
>
> You will find if you care to search the literature that any amount of
> alcohol in one's system will adversely effect coordination, reaction
> time and perhaps more importantly alertness all of which are crucial
> capabilities when it comes to driving performance.
Actually I have researched the literature. Extensively. And the reason
I know all about driver reaction times was because I was involved in a
crash where it was relevant to refute the account of the driver who
crashed into me (although it was specifically sober reaction times
that was relevant in that claim).
I suspect you haven't researched any literature at all, except a brief
review of government and pressure-group propaganda.
> It is also the case that differences occur in these respects between
> individuals all of whom have not partaken of alcohol over the past 24
> hours or even are tee-total. Physiological state, tiredness, age,
> emotional state are also factors that intrude in this respect.
>
> One thing that always puzzles me regarding the alcohol limit, and I've
> no wish to argue against it, is how it is set. Is it the case that
> anyone over the limit performs significantly worse in the above
> respects than everyone (or even nearly everyone) who drives and who's
> blood alcohol level is at near zero?
Basically they just made a judgment about the relative risks, and also
allowing a reasonable margin of error for those who, for example, had
been drinking the night before. Or perhaps they just threw a dart at
the graph drawn on the wall. Which incidentally reminds me of the
anecdote about the darts player who was arrested for being over the
limit, and only ten minutes earlier he'd thrown 3 bullseyes.
Mel Rowing
> On 30 Oct, 10:50, Mel Rowing <mel.row...@btinternet.com> wrote:
>
> > On Oct 29, 6:17 pm, Ste <ste_ro...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > The reality is that studies have shown that a moderate amount of drink
> > > actually increases the average driver's performance and reaction
> > > times.
>
> > You will find if you care to search the literature that any amount of
> > alcohol in one's system will adversely effect coordination, reaction
> > time and perhaps more importantly alertness all of which are crucial
> > capabilities when it comes to driving performance.
>
> Actually I have researched the literature. Extensively. And the reason
> I know all about driver reaction times was because I was involved in a
> crash where it was relevant to refute the account of the driver who
> crashed into me (although it was specifically sober reaction times
> that was relevant in that claim).
Then I am surprised that you will propagate such dangerous nonsense.
> I suspect you haven't researched any literature at all, except a brief
> review of government and pressure-group propaganda.
In that case I shall leave you with this:
http://www.ias.org.uk/resources/papers/europe/phproject/drinkdriving-report.pdf
It's an EU document but hardly propaganda. It was prepared by Peter
Anderson on behalf of the Institute of Alcohol
Studies, London It is well referenced. . Pp 20-23 on in particular
summarises evidence available on this particular topic. You are of
course free to follow up the references contained therein or not as
you wish.
Jon°
wro
Shitsak Isaac Goldstein
The Zionists left-wing asshole
> 'The same folks that are killing innocent people in
Palestine now, belonged to the same
> race as those who attacked prisoners in concentration camps
when they were Nazi guards.
(My Yiddisher momma 12 July 1942)
-----------------------------------------------------------------
You gotta admit Shitsak, that your new sig. suits you much
better....What! What! What!
Ste
> On Oct 30, 5:09 pm, Ste <ste_ro...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On 30 Oct, 10:50, Mel Rowing <mel.row...@btinternet.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Oct 29, 6:17 pm, Ste <ste_ro...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > The reality is that studies have shown that a moderate amount of drink
> > > > actually increases the average driver's performance and reaction
> > > > times.
>
> > > You will find if you care to search the literature that any amount of
> > > alcohol in one's system will adversely effect coordination, reaction
> > > time and perhaps more importantly alertness all of which are crucial
> > > capabilities when it comes to driving performance.
>
> > Actually I have researched the literature. Extensively. And the reason
> > I know all about driver reaction times was because I was involved in a
> > crash where it was relevant to refute the account of the driver who
> > crashed into me (although it was specifically sober reaction times
> > that was relevant in that claim).
>
> Then I am surprised that you will propagate such dangerous nonsense.
>
> > I suspect you haven't researched any literature at all, except a brief
> > review of government and pressure-group propaganda.
>
> In that case I shall leave you with this:
>
>
> It's an EU document but hardly propaganda. It was prepared by Peter
> Anderson on behalf of the Institute of Alcohol
> Studies, London It is well referenced. . Pp 20-23 on in particular
> summarises evidence available on this particular topic. You are of
> course free to follow up the references contained therein or not as
> you wish.
Briefly that document doesn't seem to contradict, or answer, any of
the points that I made. Firstly that there is little discernible
impairment until you're up to around 40mg BAC (let alone substantial
impairment), secondly a lot of the conlusions of that document appear
to be based on untested hypotheses or extrapolations from laboratory
conditions (many of such laboratory studies are based on cartoon-type
simulators), and thirdly those same extrapolations fail to take
account of what drivers actually do in the real world to mitigate the
risk (which often includes concentrating more, and driving slower -
which I think is what mainly accounts for the study which saw an
increase in safety at low BAC levels).
Even their statistics on alcohol and the number of crashes involve
taking all drivers responsible for a crash and seeing how many were
drunk, rather than taking all drink drivers and seeing how many crash
- and of course the two approaches could lead to quite different
results.
In any event Mel, I'm not saying that drink driving is justified. What
I am saying is that the evidence actually available is carefully
manipulated or framed in order to suit a certain agenda, and that most
people peddle myths about drink driving that are often totally false
(such as "drinking any amount of alcohol increases your risk of
crashing").
oldMaxim
> On Oct 30, 5:09 pm, Ste <ste_ro...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On 30 Oct, 10:50, Mel Rowing <mel.row...@btinternet.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Oct 29, 6:17 pm, Ste <ste_ro...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > The reality is that studies have shown that a moderate amount of drink
> > > > actually increases the average driver's performance and reaction
> > > > times.
>
> > > You will find if you care to search the literature that any amount of
> > > alcohol in one's system will adversely effect coordination, reaction
> > > time and perhaps more importantly alertness all of which are crucial
> > > capabilities when it comes to driving performance.
>
> > Actually I have researched the literature. Extensively. And the reason
> > I know all about driver reaction times was because I was involved in a
> > crash where it was relevant to refute the account of the driver who
> > crashed into me (although it was specifically sober reaction times
> > that was relevant in that claim).
>
> Then I am surprised that you will propagate such dangerous nonsense.
>
> > I suspect you haven't researched any literature at all, except a brief
> > review of government and pressure-group propaganda.
>
> In that case I shall leave you with this:
>
>
> It's an EU document but hardly propaganda. It was prepared by Peter
> Anderson on behalf of the Institute of Alcohol
> Studies, London It is well referenced. . Pp 20-23 on in particular
> summarises evidence available on this particular topic. You are of
> course free to follow up the references contained therein or not as
>
> - Show quoted text -
Mel - you should know by now that nobody has ever done as much
*research* as Ste, or can possibly be more qualified to authoratively
regurgitate whatever he happens to read ;-) ...if you'd bothered to
read the entire internet you'd know that!
Ste
As I've said before, I rarely open my mouth on subjects that I know
nothing about, and if I do open my mouth it normally means I know a
fair bit.
There is no respectable literature which suggests, as Mel claims, that
*any* amount of alcohol in the system affects a person's competency to
drive. At best such a conclusion would be based on extrapolation and
supposition, and not on evidence.
What is more, studies on driver behaviour *in the real world* have
shown that the way in which people compensate for being drunk (whether
consciously, or due to physiological changes) actually *enhances*
their reactions and *reduces* their overall risk at lower levels of
intoxication (though obviously, as intoxication continues to increase,
eventually performance does suffer and risk does increase).
So clearly *the evidence* presents quite a different picture from the
propaganda. The propaganda says that any level of intoxication while
driving is bad, because you drive worse, and pose an increasing risk
to other road users, in proportion to your intoxication. The
*evidence* says that low levels of intoxication (certainly, lower than
the limit) have an insubstantial (if any) effect on specific
measurable abilities (like reaction time, visual perception, etc.),
and that when one factors in behavioural compensation (e.g. due to
risk homeostasis, or reduced anxiety levels, etc.) overall driver
performance can actually *increase*, and risk *decrease*, at certain
levels of intoxication.
And to relate this back to the news bit at the beginning of this
thread, what the Irish MP said may well be correct.
Mel Rowing
> As I've said before, I rarely open my mouth on subjects that I know
> nothing about, and if I do open my mouth it normally means I know a
> fair bit.
>
> There is no respectable literature which suggests, as Mel claims, that
> *any* amount of alcohol in the system affects a person's competency to
> drive. At best such a conclusion would be based on extrapolation and
> supposition, and not on evidence.
Abstract.
Effects of alcohol and other drugs on driver performance.
Ogden E.J , Moskovitz H.
Centre for Drugs and Driving, Swinburne University of Technology,
Australia.
In the past century we have learned that driving performance is
impaired by alcohol even in low dosage, and that many other drugs are
also linked to impairment. This paper is a summary of some of the more
relevant studies in the past fifty years--an overview of our knowledge
and unanswered questions. There is no evidence of a threshold blood
alcohol (BAC) below which impairment does not occur, and there is no
defined category of drivers who will not be impaired by alcohol.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15276919
Now can anything be stated clearer than that ?
Or is this too "propaganda" ?
Robert Henderson
<26f16d3a-1c2b-409a...@j24g2000yqa.googlegroups.com>, Mel
Rowing <mel.r...@btinternet.com> writes
>In the past century we have learned that driving performance is
>impaired by alcohol even in low dosage, and that many other drugs are
>also linked to impairment.
The problem with this is it pays no heed to the human personality. A
more relaxed state may more than compensate for a slight loss in
physical capacity to respond. rH
Ste
You know Mel I'm not having a go at you specifically as a
propagandist. I'm saying there is a lot of propaganda out there, but
if we look very closely we find that the evidence is not nearly as
unequivocal as some groups suggest.
The link you've provided is merely an abstract, and I don't have
access to the full article. But as even the abstract says, they have
taken no account of how emotion impacts on driver behaviour, and this
is the issue that the Irish MP was responding to (namely that a drink
might calm a person down).
Nor also have they addressed the issue that many of these drunks
crashing late at night may well very tired, and since other studies
show that a moderate amount of tiredness is an imnpairment equivalent
to being over the limit, then I think it may well be more apt to say
that tired-driving kills rather than drunk-driving.
Ste
> Rowing <mel.row...@btinternet.com> writes
>
> >In the past century we have learned that driving performance is
> >impaired by alcohol even in low dosage, and that many other drugs are
> >also linked to impairment.
>
> The problem with this is it pays no heed to the human personality. A
> more relaxed state may more than compensate for a slight loss in
> physical capacity to respond. rH
Which is precisely the point.