Skip to main content

The best lying headlines of the week: eating while driving more dangerous than driving drunk


Eating While Driving Significantly Increases Chances Of A Car Accident, Experts Say


Except that the article from CBS Los Angeles beneath this headline does not say anything of the sort.

Only one person is quoted in the article who says eating while driving is unsafe (so forget the plural), and--guess what?--he's not an expert.

He's a California Highway Patrolman who admits that eating while driving isn't illegal but that he's used a variety of dodges to get around the law to charge people anyway.

But don't let that stop you, pseudo-journalists.  Then WTOP picks up the story today, including this sentence: 
Experts tell CBS Los Angeles that eating while driving increases your chance of a car accident by 80 percent.
Except that if you click through the link (which I left in the sentence for your convenience) you go back to the original CBS story, and--guess what?--there is no such quote in the first story.  The California Highway Patrolman (who is apparently both expert and experts) NEVER says in the story that eating while driving will increase your chances of an accident by 80%.

This particular tempest seems to trace back to a University of Leeds study in 2012 that purportedly found that drinking a soda while driving was more dangerous than driving drunk.

And if you finally (it took me twenty minutes, and I'm good at this stuff) work your way back through all the hand-wringing articles about unsafe we all are because we drink a soda while we drive, you will discover the following useful pieces of information about the Leeds study:

1.  It was financed by an insurance company.

2.  No road tests were actually used in the survey, only driving simulators.

3.  Only ten drivers were actually tested, each in about 4-5 different travel conditions (urban, rural, etc.)

4.  Each test lasted four minutes.  This means that the entire study consumed all of about 200 minutes of observed driving time on simulators.

5.  The study was actually meant to determine the issues surrounding one-handed driving for any reason, not specifically eating.

In other words, the study is pretty much garbage.  It even condemned using a finger to punch in a new radio station.

But it has become oh-so-influential garbage.

That's why it pays to click through the links.

Comments

Anonymous said…
This is how they make education policy. No lie.
November 13, 2013 at 10:52 AM
kavips said…
Economic policy
Health Policy,
Insurance Regulatory policy.
Food Safety policy.
etc....
November 14, 2013 at 12:12 AM
NCSDad said…
It is frightening how we can ignore the science. Doing other things w hile driving increases the chance for a mishap. Doing them more often, or with diminished capacity makes it worse. We can try to legislate around each capability and each distraction or ... hold people accountable for the accidents they cause and thereby encompass all the variables.
November 14, 2013 at 6:32 AM
Anonymous said…
IT is SHOCKING how little you know about statistics. But I guess n one ever accused a libertarian of being intelligent at any aspect of life.
November 25, 2013 at 1:25 AM
Steven H. Newton said…
@Anon

Great charge (completely without specifics).

Thanks for playing.
November 25, 2013 at 7:49 AM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

A Libertarian Martin Luther King Jr. Day post

In which we travel into interesting waters . . . (for a fairly long trip, so be prepared) Dr. King's 1968 book, Where do we go from here:  chaos or community? , is profound in that it criticizes anti-poverty programs for their piecemeal approach, as John Schlosberg of the Center for a Stateless Society  [C4SS] observes: King noted that the antipoverty programs of the time “proceeded from a premise that poverty is a consequence of multiple evils,” with separate programs each dedicated to individual issues such as education and housing. Though in his view “none of these remedies in itself is unsound,” they “all have a fatal disadvantage” of being “piecemeal,” with their implementation having “fluctuated at the whims of legislative bodies” or been “entangled in bureaucratic stalling.”   The result is that “fragmentary and spasmodic reforms have failed to reach down to the profoundest needs of the poor.” Such single-issue approaches also have “another common failing — ...
44 comments
Read more

The Obligatory Libertarian Tax Day Post

The most disturbing factoid that I learned on Tax Day was that the average American must now spend a full twenty-four hours filling out tax forms. That's three work days. Or, think of it this way: if you had to put in two hours per night after dinner to finish your taxes, that's two weeks (with Sundays off). I saw a talking head economics professor on some Philly TV channel pontificating about how Americans procrastinate. He was laughing. The IRS guy they interviewed actually said, "Tick, tick, tick." You have to wonder if Governor Ruth Ann Minner and her cohorts put in twenty-four hours pondering whether or not to give Kraft Foods $708,000 of our State taxes while demanding that school districts return $8-10 million each?
1 comment
Read more

New Warfare: I started my posts with a discussion.....

.....on Unrestricted warfare . The US Air force Institute for National Security Studies have developed a reasonable systems approach to deter non-state violent actors who they label as NSVA's. It is an exceptionally important report if we want to deter violent extremism and other potential violent actors that could threaten this nation and its security. It is THE report our political officials should be listening to to shape policy so that we do not become excessive in using force against those who do not agree with policy and dispute it with reason and normal non-violent civil disobedience. This report, should be carefully read by everyone really concerned with protecting civil liberties while deterring violent terrorism and I recommend if you are a professional you send your recommendations via e-mail at the link above so that either 1.) additional safeguards to civil liberties are included, or 2.) additional viable strategies can be used. Finally, one can only hope that politici...
1 comment
Read more