Cell Phone Users Kill TWICE as Many Each Year, as Soldiers Who Have Died In Iraq

[Mr. Kotter]

Wow. :eek:

Of course, I'm sure it's bogus though... :rolleyes:

Drivers on cell phones kill thousands
Study explores mechanism behind deadly distraction

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/6895319/

By Robert Roy Britt
Senior writer
LiveScience
Updated: 2:42 p.m. ET Feb. 1, 2005


When young adults use cell phones while driving, they're as bad as a 70-year-old on the verge of a nap and signaling for that eventual left turn. And yes, you can blame the chatty 20-somethings for the stop-and-go traffic on the way to work.

A new study confirms that the reaction time of cellphone users slows dramatically, increasing the risk of accidents and tying up traffic in general.

"If you put a 20-year-old driver behind the wheel with a cell phone, their reaction times are the same as a 70-year-old driver who is not using a cell phone," said University of Utah psychology professor David Strayer. "It's like instantly aging a large number of drivers."

The study was announced Tuesday and is detailed in winter issue of the quarterly journal Human Factors.

Traffic jams and death
Cellphone distraction causes 2,600 deaths and 330,000 injuries in the United States every year, according to the journal's publisher, the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society.

The reason is now obvious:

Drivers talking on cell phones were 18 percent slower to react to brake lights, the new study found. In a minor bright note, they kept a 12 percent greater following distance. But they also took 17 percent longer to regain the speed they lost when they braked. That frustrates everyone."Once drivers on cell phones hit the brakes, it takes them longer to get back into the normal flow of traffic," Strayer said. "The net result is they are impeding the overall flow of traffic."

Strayer and his colleagues have been down this road before. In 2001, they found that even hands-free cell phone use distracted drivers. In 2003 they revealed a reason: Drivers look but don't see, because they're distracted by the conversation. The scientists also found previously that chatty motorists are less adept than drunken drivers with blood alcohol levels exceeding 0.08.

Separate research last year at University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign supported the conclusion that hands-free cellphone use causes driver distraction.

"With younger adults, everything got worse," said Arthur Kramer, who led the Illinois study. "Both young adults and older adults tended to show deficits in performance. They made more errors in detecting important changes, and they took longer to react to the changes."

The impaired reactions involved seconds, not just fractions of a second, so stopping distances increased by car lengths.


Older drivers more cautious
The latest study used high-tech simulators. It included people aged 18 to 25 and another group aged 65 to 74. Elderly drivers were slower to react when talking on the phone, too.

The simulations uncovered a twofold increase in the number of rear-end collisions by drivers using cell phones.

Older drivers seem to be more cautious overall, however.

"Older drivers were slightly less likely to get into accidents than younger drivers," Strayer said. "They tend to have a greater following distance. Their reactions are impaired, but they are driving so cautiously they were less likely to smash into somebody." But in real life, he added, older drivers are significantly more likely to be rear-ended because of their slow speed.


Other studies in the journal found:

Telephone numbers presented by automated voice systems compete for drivers' attention to a far greater extent than when the driver sees the same information presented on a display.
Interruptions to driving, such as answering a call, are likely to be more dangerous if they occur during maneuvers like merging to exit a freeway.
Things could get worse. Wireless Internet, speech recognition systems and e-mail could all be even more distracting.
© 2005 LiveScience.com. All rights reserved.

[Brock]

Die.

[Saulbadguy]

Yeah, cell phones kill people, but guns don't.

[Mr. Kotter]

Die.

Murderer! :harumph:

[Mr. Kotter]

Yeah, cell phones kill people, but guns don't.

Guns are regulated; cell phone use should be too.

[go bo]

Murderer! :harumph:that reminds me of something...

just can't remember what... :(

[Donger]

The most annoying cell phone users: men at the airport that while talking on their cell phones insist on walking around.

[Saulbadguy]

BTW, its not "bogus", but its nothing new. People get in accidents because they are inattentive, whether it be from a:

Cell phone
Food/drink item
Radio
Make up
Children in the backseat
Pets in the vehicle

[Herzig]

A good friend of mine from high school(probably one of the nicest people you could hope to meet) lost her leg in an accident caused by someone who was not paying attention to the road and talking on the cell.

I'm probably guilty of doing this some, but I at least try to use my hands free as much as possible.

[go bo]

Because .08 is a silly line.what is that, anyway?

two beers in two hours or something?

[Saulbadguy]

Guns are regulated; cell phone use should be too.
Lets just regulate people who can't drive.

[Donger]

Yeah, cell phones kill people, but guns don't.

Well, technically, they don't. The bullets they fire do.

Unless, of course, the gun is used to beat someone to death.

[Herzig]

I can't stand it when I see a beeotch putting on makeup while driving. It pisses me off.

[go bo]

Well, by all means let's regulate conversing with passengers, too.yeah, i was wondering why conversation in the car isn't as distracting as conversations on the phone...

[Saulbadguy]

Well, technically, they don't. The bullets they fire do.

Unless, of course, the gun is used to beat someone to death.
I suppose someone could bludgeon a person to death with a cell phone as well...:D

[Donger]

I walk around when I'm at home on the phone. I don't know why... I've got some sort of inability to sit still when talking to someone who isn't there.

That's it; you go on the list.

Seriously, check and see if you start walking around next time you're on your cell.

[Mr. Kotter]

Well, by all means let's regulate conversing with passengers, too.

I agree; now STFU. :p

Seriously though, there seems to be a difference in the studies I've seen.....why talking on the phone would be more distracting than talking to a passenger, is something I don't know....but there does seem to be a differnce. Unless of course, it's encouraging your GF as she's giving you a hummer goin' down the interstate....apparently, that's quite distracting too...

[Saulbadguy]

Can I use one of those mid-80's phones? I think it might take awhile with my current model.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/olmedia/1775000/images/_1778067_fonecash-bbc300.jpg

That would do some serious damage. Or you could choke someone to death with the cord on a bag phone.

[Mr. Kotter]

Lets just regulate people who can't drive.

Good plan; as the evidence seems pretty clear that those talking on cell phones can't fuggin' drive.... :p

[Donger]

I suppose someone could bludgeon a person to death with a cell phone as well...:D

I came close to doing that last week. But with the size of cell phones today, it would have taken me at least a half-dozen good whacks to kill him.

Made me long for the good old days, when cell phones were the size and weight of a field radio.

[go bo]

I agree; now STFU. :p

Seriously though, there seems to be a difference in the studies I've seen.....why talking on the phone would be more distracting than talking to a passenger, is something I don't know....but there does seem to be a differnce. Unless of course, it's encouraging your GF as she's giving you a hummer goin' down the interstate....apparently, that's quite distracting too...apparently?

i would have sworn you were speaking from experience...

say, where were you last night? we were having a gochiefs party and we missed you... :(

[Saulbadguy]

Good plan; as the evidence seems pretty clear that those talking on cell phones can't fuggin' drive.... :p
I and many others I know talk on them while we are driving. The act of dialing is usually not a good idea when driving, but with voice dial..its simple. Its not that hard. Why isn't eating and driving more dangerous?

[Herzig]

I agree; now STFU. :p

. Unless of course, it's encouraging your GF as she's giving you a hummer goin' down the interstate....apparently, that's quite distracting too...

I've had that happen several times in my life. Quite enjoyable.. I can't help but think about that Robin Williams movie "The World According to Garp" where his wife bites his off in the Buick, every time that happens. It makes me drive better actually :)

[Donger]

I know I do. I first noticed it after watching Swingers w/ the director's commentary on. There's a scene w/ Mikey on the phone and he's just pacing around his apartment. He makes a comment about it... and I realized, "Son of a bitch! I do that."

Now I notice it while I'm on the phone.

Eh. I wouldn't last long around you.

[Iowanian]

Cell phones are like Guns.

Neither kill people..........the People using them irresponsibly do.

[Soupnazi]

The scientists also found previously that chatty motorists are less adept than drunken drivers with blood alcohol levels exceeding 0.08.

I'm sure the freaks at MADD will now be dedicating themselves to the evils of cell phone talking while driving.

[Saulbadguy]

Sort of..but cell phones were not designed to kill things.

[Mr. Kotter]

apparently?

i would have sworn you were speaking from experience...

say, where were you last night? we were having a gochiefs party and we missed you... :(

No, I was with Bria....er, eh my wife. Yeah, that's it. ROFL

[Mr. Kotter]

Cell phones are like Guns.

Neither kill people..........the People using them irresponsibly do.

Personally, the right to gun ownership is protected by the second amendment.

The wife callin' you to say, "Can you pick me up some tampons on the way home?" isn't Constitutionally protected as far as I can tell. :hmmm:

[Soupnazi]

Guns and antibiotics have both killed things. Both were designed to save people's lives, and both have killed people. Which would you ban? Antibiotic rights aren't mentioned in the constitution.

[Mr. Kotter]

.... Why isn't eating and driving more dangerous?

Personally, eating is more like breathing. Talkin' on the cell phone, depending on the nature of the conversation.....can be much more distracting. Think about it.

Especially, those calls to those 1-900 lines....heh. ROFL

[Mr. Kotter]

So, it shouldn't be legal? :spock:

I don't know. I'm pondering the question of whether or not government has the right, or obligation....in the name of public safety.....to discourage cell phone use WHILE DRIVING.

I haven't decided what I think yet really; it's interesting to me though. :hmmm:

[Mr. Kotter]

Guns and antibiotics have both killed things. Both were designed to save people's lives, and both have killed people. Which would you ban? Antibiotic rights aren't mentioned in the constitution.

It's the apparent numbers and incidence of deaths caused by the phenomena that drives the question for me. If an antibiotic killed 2600 people a year....I'm sure it would be taken off the market pretty quickly. :shrug:

[Saulbadguy]

Personally, eating is more like breathing. Talkin' on the cell phone, depending on the nature of the conversation.....can be much more distracting. Think about it.

Especially, those calls to those 1-900 lines....heh. ROFL
But neither is a necessity when driving. Nor is listening to music, which can also be distracting.

There is no solution, really. Having "hands free" kits won't help, because people will still be involved in a conversation. And believe it or not, some of the conversations are vital to these persons jobs and lives.

The answer lies within the future. Automated transportation systems, AKA Cars that can drive themselves. Of course, that could take awhile.

[Mr. Kotter]

I don't have to hold the air to breath it. I don't have to look at it to get it in my lungs. There's no possibility of loose air particles falling in my lap, which I will then attempt to pick up.

Comparing eating while driving to breathing is ridiculous.

I didn't say it was precisely like it; but it is more similar....and personally, I rarely :shrug: eat when I drive.

[Saulbadguy]

Guns and antibiotics have both killed things. Both were designed to save people's lives, and both have killed people. Which would you ban? Antibiotic rights aren't mentioned in the constitution.
Haha. Reminds me of a game called "Drug Wars". Imagine gang members throwing penicillin at each other instead of shooting at each other.

[Bearcat]

Drivers look but don't see, because they're distracted by the conversation.

Someone told me that once.... people don't look around as much when they're on the phone. I know I look around just as much when someone else is in the car, but I've never noticed if I do or not when I'm on the phone. I've never had any problems driving and talking though. Actually, I'm driving right now.

[Mr. Kotter]

...There is no solution, really. Having "hands free" kits won't help, because people will still be involved in a conversation. And believe it or not, some of the conversations are vital to these persons jobs and lives.
...

"Good God! How did we EVER survive without cell phones! Oh, the inhumanity of those days!" ROFL

j/k, Saul....but you get the point. :)

[Mr. Kotter]

Before the advent of cell phones how many deaths were caused by car accident annually?

Presently, how many car accident fatalities are there each year that aren't determined to be caused by cell phones?

Both are good questions. :hmmm:

:thumb:

[Saulbadguy]

"Good God! How did we EVER survive without cell phones! Oh, the inhumanity of those days!" ROFL

j/k, Saul....but you get the point. :)
We survived without cell phones, but todays business moves much faster, and in a higher volume. More means of communication=information moves faster=money moves faster. But..you should know this :) :p

[Mr. Kotter]

But, it's NOT more similar. Breathing is zero distraction level. It doesn't even require conscious thought to achieve (barring something like an asthma attack).

Eating takes at least some of your attention away from driving. One has conscious thought about taking a bite, chewing, dropping a pickle on their lap, etc. It's a distraction... and therefore is more similar, for the sake of this conversation, to talking on a cell phone than breathing.

You damn analytic nerds..... :banghead:

Fine; it's not like breathing....but it IS much, much less distracting than talking on the phone for most people...as long as you aren't tryin' to eat Ribs or spaghetti.... :p

ROFL

[Mr. Kotter]

We survived without cell phones, but todays business moves much faster, and in a higher volume. More means of communication=information moves faster=money moves faster. But..you should know this :) :p

I know. And don't misunderstand me....I like technology and computers and modern conveniences....I'm really NOT railing against them.

I just think to myself, if regulating cell phone use by those who are driving an automobile would save thousands of lives potentially...isn't that something worth at least looking at? I'm really just wondering, aloud.... :shrug:

[Donger]

Before the advent of cell phones how many deaths were caused by car accident annually?

Presently, how many car accident fatalities are there each year that aren't determined to be caused by cell phones?

IIRC, Oklahoma performed a study back in the late 90s. They reached the conclusion that cell phone usage while driving led to a 9X increase in traffic accident fatalities.

[Mr. Kotter]

I don't think you can quantitatively say that. Personally, I feel it takes much less focus to listen to someone talk than to manage a double quarter pounder while driving.

Could be. IF I eat, it's usually something much less ambitious than a double quarter pounder....it's more like peanuts or an apple. But that's just me, I guess.

[Bearcat]

Personally, eating is more like breathing. Talkin' on the cell phone, depending on the nature of the conversation.....can be much more distracting. Think about it.

Especially, those calls to those 1-900 lines....heh. ROFL

I've never had a big problem eating and driving, but I try not to eat something like a footlong meatball sub while driving, either (you have total happiness on your shirt, hehe).

I do have a hands-free device at home that I use every once in a while when people call in the middle of a video game, but I've never used it in my car..... perhaps I should try driving, eating, and talking on the phone one day :hmmm:

[Mr. Kotter]

Haha. I used to work with a gal who one day told us she would read a book while driving.


I've SEEN that biatch more than once, damn it....if I'd had my cell phone I'd have called the friggin' cops! :p

That or if we had been alone on the highway I'd have shot her ass... :harumph:

[Mr. Kotter]

IIRC, Oklahoma performed a study back in the late 90s. They reached the conclusion that cell phone usage while driving led to a 9X increase in traffic accident fatalities.

Wow. And yet very few people are actually talking about doing anything about it....really. Why is that? :shake:

[Saulbadguy]

I know. And don't misunderstand me....I like technology and computers and modern conveniences....I'm really NOT railing against them.

I just think to myself, if regulating cell phone use by those who are driving an automobile would save thousands of lives potentially...isn't that something worth at least looking at? I'm really just wondering, aloud.... :shrug:
IMO, no.

[Donger]

Nothing personal against Donger, but I'm not assuming that's truth.

In 1997, The New England Journal of Medicine reported that motorists who use cell phones are four times more likely to crash and equated the use of the phones with drunk driving. In a three-year study of Oklahoma crash data, researchers linked cell phone use with a ninefold increase in fatalities. According to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), Oklahoma is the only state to have such data.

http://my.webmd.com/content/article/24/1728_57668

[Mr. Kotter]

Jesus, I'm sorry. We were all like, "WTF?" and were very glad we didn't frequent the stretch of road between KC and Omaha.

And I swear, I'm NOT shittin' you....I've seen it at least TWICE on that stretch of I-29---on my way to or from Chief's games.

I'm dead serious...

Wow. :shake:

[Donger]

IMO, no.

I forget exactly which countries prohibit ANY cell phone use while driving (including hands-free), but it's extensive.

[grandllama]

Haha. I used to work with a gal who one day told us she would read a book while driving.

I had a coworker at the State of Indiana that used to read the morning newspaper on the commute from Fishers to Indianapolis (that will mean something only to those in Indy)...

I ended up behind him one day in the fast lane doing 80 and not only was he reading the paper, he was eating a donut, drinking coffee, and trying to shave....

Scared the beejeezus out of me...

[Eleazar]

If you ask me what's even worse than cellphones are women who fard while driving. Every time I look over at the next car and see a woman concentrating on trying to fard in traffic I get the hell away.

Women who fard in traffic are a menace if you ask me.

[Donger]

I know. And don't misunderstand me....I like technology and computers and modern conveniences....I'm really NOT railing against them.

I just think to myself, if regulating cell phone use by those who are driving an automobile would save thousands of lives potentially...isn't that something worth at least looking at? I'm really just wondering, aloud.... :shrug:

Well, the data show that talking on your cell while driving increases the risk of you getting in an accident. So, my first thought would be when are the insurance companies going to increase premiums on folks who yak on their cell phones while driving?

Pretty hard to regulate, I guess, but I wouldn't be surprised if those vultures were considering it.

[Donger]

Women who fard in traffic are a menace if you ask me.

They are in bed, too. That's a guy thing, you dirty whores.

[Donger]

What does that mean, exactly?

In year X there were Y fatalities... and in year X+3 there were 9Y fatalities?

And, if so, how do they determine what portion of the nine-fold increase is due to cell phones? I'm assuming there's a percentage of 9Y that a cellphone was involved in... how did that percentage compare to year X?

I just don't understand what the numbers are behind that sentence.

Yeah, I know. The wording is certainly confusing, perhaps intentionally so.

I'll try and find the actual study.

[Donger]

Some interesting stats here: http://www.ncsl.org/programs/transportation/cellphoneupdate1203.htm

[Donger]

So, we have about 43,000 car accident fatalities each year. The study SD posted blames cell phone distraction for 2,600 of those.

6% is pretty shocking, IMO.

It'd be interesting to see how the other 94% break down.

[Bearcat]

Some interesting stats here: http://www.ncsl.org/programs/transportation/cellphoneupdate1203.htm


5600 inattention crashes, 600 because of a cell phone..... that sounds pretty reasonable to me. I didn't read it, so I don't know if it lists the majority of what "inattention crashes" involve, but one out of every 10 doesn't seem out of the ordinary when there's so many other distractions :shrug:

[Saulbadguy]

So, we have about 43,000 car accident fatalities each year. The study SD posted blames cell phone distraction for 2,600 of those.

6% is pretty shocking, IMO.

It'd be interesting to see how the other 94% break down.
I wonder if "is not a good driver" is a citable reason.

[Donger]

I wonder if "is not a good driver" is a citable reason.

Is anyone that happens to cause an accident being a "good driver" at the time?

[Saulbadguy]

Is anyone that happens to cause an accident being a "good driver" at the time?
Nope. I say we regulate them.

[Donger]

Maybe it wasn't really an accident...

Heh. I went nuts one night when I was younger and played demolition derby on my then-recently "ex" girlfriend's car. Scared the piss out of her, literally.

[Donger]

Nope. I say we regulate them.

Insurance companies already do that.

[Donger]

F*ckin' Zoloft.

Shaefer, actually.

[Saulbadguy]

Insurance companies already do that.
Great. So eventually it will all work itself out.

[Phobia]

I don't know if it has yet been said, but I think this study should be used to ban both 20 year olds and 70 year olds from driving.

[Donger]

Niiice.

Not really. After that little incident, one of my brothers told me that Shaefer caused some weird kind of chemical imbalance in certain people; you know, beyond plain old drunkeness.

I never really looked into it, but I didn't drink Shaefer after that night, even though this particular brother was (and is) consistantly full of sh*t.

[Calcountry]

Yeah, cell phones kill people, but guns don't.Excellent rhetorical point.

[Saulbadguy]

Excellent rhetorical point.
Sorry..what was that? I was busy polishing my cell phone rack.

[Mr. Kotter]

Was she blonde?

Can't recall....she had nice jugs though. :hmmm:

[Eleazar]

Is farding similar to farting?

Not really.

It's a not-very-funny-anyway joke that no one got... :shrug:

[Donger]

Not really.

It's a not-very-funny-anyway joke that no one got... :shrug:

ROFL

Are you serious? I thought you were being delicate.

[KCFalcon59]

Not really.

It's a not-very-funny-anyway joke that no one got... :shrug:

I got it. I laughed to myself. heh

[Eleazar]

Damnit. Now I'm doomed to wander the Earth for the rest of my years not knowing what a fard is?

http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book=Dictionary&va=fard&x=25&y=16

[chiefs4me]

I don't know if it has yet been said, but I think this study should be used to ban both 20 year olds and 70 year olds from driving.


God yes,,especially the 70 year olds. I swear everyone should be made to take the actual road test when they turn 65. :)

[Rain Man]

It's probably been stated before, but I'm keeping this handy for the next time a combat veteran calls me a coward. Who's staying here in the heat, and who's going to Iraq where it's safer?

[Mr. Kotter]

It's probably been stated before, but I'm keeping this handy for the next time a combat veteran calls me a coward. Who's staying here in the heat, and who's going to Iraq where it's safer?

Funny, I thought the same thing.... ROFL

Next time Johnny comes around, I'm gonna point out that SD has more cell phones per capita than any state in the country....and the average minutes are nearly double the U.S. average. Therefore, I'm gonna petition Congress for COMBAT FUGGIN' PAY!!! And a medal!

Then I'm gonna demand some damn pie!!! :cuss:

:harumph:

[Mr. Kotter]

God yes,,especially the 70 year olds. I swear everyone should be made to take the actual road test when they turn 65. :)

Expand that road test requirement to include women of all ages, and you got a deal.... :p

[Inspector]

One of the Raider fans driving when his cell phone rang and startled him. He dropped the joint he was smoking and in the ensuing search for the fallen bud he wrecked into a pole.

See, call phones really do cause accidents. Damn cell phones!