Watchdogs: Feds buried data proving that handheld tech dangerously distracts drivers

[shawmutt]

http://www.scientificamerican.com/b...watchdogs-feds-buried-data-proving-2009-07-21

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) put politics above public safety in 2003 when it suppressed research estimating that cell phone use—both phone calls and text messaging—while driving had caused hundreds of thousands of car accidents and hundreds of crash-related deaths the previous year, the New York Times reports. This information came to light today when two Washington, D.C., consumer advocacy groups—Public Safety and the Ralph Nader-founded Center for Auto Safety—won their Freedom of Information Act lawsuit to make public the some 250 pages of research compiled in 2003.

...

Aside from being fodder for conspiracy theorists, I can't figure out the rationale for burying this report. This article states "Congress discouraged the NHTSA from releasing the information (even threatening to withhold funding), warning the agency to "stick to its mission of gathering safety data," NHTSA officials told the Times. The legislators were reportedly concerned that the agency would take its research directly to the states in an attempt to encourage them to pass laws against cell phone use while driving."

States have been passing these laws for some time now, so that doesn't make sense. Why did it take all this hassle to get the data released?

 

[theprestige]

Obviously the real cause of the economic recession is the decreased use of cell phones, due to the new laws and new information about the risks of using cell phones while driving.

We're trying to minimize the damage, though, by blaming the recession on a "housing bubble" and "toxic asssets".

 

[casebro]

I blame Bill Gates.

Actually, the economic collapse is caused by the PC. It has replaced the typewriter. With the PC's editing, there is no more need for White-Out. No more need for the little bottles, so the people who made the bottles are out of work. Same for the cap workers. And the guys who made the sticky paper for the labels. And the printers. And the girls who stick the labels on, the bottle fillers, the cap twisters. Even the guy who punched the cardboard discs that seal the cap. Add in the cumulative effects of taking that much money out of the economy, and it's a wonder we are not all starving.

 

[shawmutt]

So no one else can make sense of it either. I guess it's another mark for ineptitude.

 

[casebro]

Studies that show the hazards of driving while using electronic devices have been publicized for years anyhow.

The quote "warning the agency to "stick to its mission of gathering safety data," NHTSA officials told the Times." makes me wonder what, besides "safety data", could be in those reports?

But back to possible CT, the only people I can think of that would be excessively pro-cell phone would be cell phone sellers.

 

[Alt+F4]

Aside from being fodder for conspiracy theorists, I can't figure out the rationale for burying this report.

I can't figure out the rationale for writing this report! Did we really need a government report to tell us that talking on the phone while driving is distracting? Really?

 

[Psi Baba]

I can't figure out the rationale for writing this report! Did we really need a government report to tell us that talking on the phone while driving is distracting? Really?

This was exactly my reaction when I read the OP. It's like the recent study that concluded that cats are manipulative. You don't say!

 

[leftysergeant]

I can't figure out the rationale for writing this report! Did we really need a government report to tell us that talking on the phone while driving is distracting? Really?

And how long did it take for the government to officially pronounce cigarettes as really, REALLY not good for you?

Same sort of thing. Same players with a different objective.

 

[shawmutt]

Same sort of thing. Same players with a different objective.

What objective? That's my question. Is there a huge cell phone industry lobby in D.C. comparable to the tobacco industry?

 

[GodMark2]

What objective? That's my question. Is there a huge cell phone industry lobby in D.C. comparable to the tobacco industry?

Sprint, Verizon, AT&T. You may recognize some of those names.

An article written in The Oregonian a few weeks ago by a legislator trying to get a bill to the floor against using a phone while driving stated that every time he had a meeting with another congressman, a 'representative' from one or more of the aforementioned companies was just leaving. The bill was never even discussed in it's committee.

 

[Alt+F4]

And how long did it take for the government to officially pronounce cigarettes as really, REALLY not good for you?

Same sort of thing. Same players with a different objective.

I don't know what's in a cigarette by looking at it. It's common sense that talking on the phone or texting while driving is dangerous.

$6 million dollars later the federal government has come to the same conclusion:

Mr. Hanowski said the texting analysis was financed by $300,000 from the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration, which has the mission of improving safety in trucks and buses. More broadly, the research yielding the results represent a significant logistical undertaking.

The overall cost was $6 million to equip the trucks with video cameras and track them for three million miles as they hauled furniture, frozen foods and other goods across the country.

Link:
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/28/technology/28texting.html?hp

 

[rwguinn]

News Flash:
Feds buried data proving that reading newspapers dangerously distracts drivers
Feds buried data proving that sexual encounters dangerously distract drivers while on the road
Feds buried data proving that driving 20MPH below the speed limit is dangerous on Freeways

Anyone who has to rely on the Feds to show what is obvious is an idiot

 

[Marquis de Carabas]

Anyone who has to rely on the Feds to show what is obvious is an idiot

I'm tempted to agree with this, but would like to see a federal agency report on it before I commit myself.

 

[Michael Redman]

Is there any reason to think the study was really only an attempt to determine whether or not handheld devices are distracting?

What would be ridiculous would not be a study of the danger of driving while using handheld devices, but rather to make a decision on whether to regulate the use of such devices without first ascertaining the degree of danger posed by their use.

 

[tomwaits]

NPR has talked about several studies showing the effects of using cellphones and headphones while driving. So the studies are out there, and the discovery of a government study saying the same thing doesn't strike me as particularly mind-blowing.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

We need a study to tell us this?

It's not like no one knows texting is not conducive to driving.