burnin1
Well-Known Member
From mynorthwest.com
Fact Check: Is marijuana really causing fatal crashes?
By Jason Rantz, KIRO Radio Host | August 21, 2015 @ 6:14 am
Is pot causing more fatal crashes than in previous years? Because the implication from headlines is that we're seeing an alarming trend.
Headlines like "Fatal crashes involving marijuana doubled in Washington after legalization" and "Data: More pot-impaired drivers in deadly crashes in Wash" seem to send the message that stoned drivers are causing the fatal crashes, especially in the context that we now live in a state with legalized marijuana. In fact, NPR actually frames the data with the stoned-drivers fear in mind. So, let's fact check how the media is covering the story.
Is the role of marijuana in fatal crashes as bad as the reports imply?
The Jason Rantz Show fact checking machine says absolutely not. It's not at all true. Context is key. All the articles are citing data from the Washington Traffic Safety Commission. The AP writes, in part:
According to the Seattle Times, "the number of drivers involved in fatal crashes with THC in their body increased from 38 in 2013 to 75 this past year." And according to NPR, since marijuana legalization, the percentage of blood tests that contained THC increased by 33 percent!
But of those 75, the Times cites, only about half of them had active THC in them. And that increase of 33 percent? It's not exactly what you think. If you're an occasional user, THC could be found in your system four days after smoking once and that doesn't mean you're high.
Next, you can blame those 37 incidents on legal weed, I suppose, but that would be rather ignorant of the fact that legal weed stores didn't open until July of 2014 (which the Times does a good job of pointing out) and that pretty much no one was buying because the prices were high and the supplies were low. As the Times points out:
We're not saying A equals B, said commission spokeswoman Shelly Baldwin about the link between fatal crashes and marijuana use in the Seattle Times. We're saying this is a factor. We look for trends and this is a trend we're seeing.
To be fair, some media reports are basing their headlines and shaping their coverage of this in a misleading way, and it's not the fault of this commission. But to say this is a trend? That more people have THC in their system involved in fatal crashes? Sorry, but that seems more like scare mongering masquerading as science. There's no causal relationship that they've shown (which they admit) and if there's no causal relationship, this isn't ready to be disseminated for the public to think this is meaningful.
What's most surprising is what's not often discussed, out of fear that it will send the wrong message. Driving while stoned isn't necessarily as bad as you think. According to the Washington Post
Other studies have shown drivers who were high were hyperaware that they were high, so they ended up driving slower and more safely.
Now, this doesn't mean you should go out and get high and drive (please, don't) but it should offer you a toke of some fact-driven data, not fear mongering.
http://mynorthwest.com/992/2798995/Fact-Check-Is-marijuana-really-causing-fatal-crashes
Fact Check: Is marijuana really causing fatal crashes?
By Jason Rantz, KIRO Radio Host | August 21, 2015 @ 6:14 am
Is pot causing more fatal crashes than in previous years? Because the implication from headlines is that we're seeing an alarming trend.
Headlines like "Fatal crashes involving marijuana doubled in Washington after legalization" and "Data: More pot-impaired drivers in deadly crashes in Wash" seem to send the message that stoned drivers are causing the fatal crashes, especially in the context that we now live in a state with legalized marijuana. In fact, NPR actually frames the data with the stoned-drivers fear in mind. So, let's fact check how the media is covering the story.
Is the role of marijuana in fatal crashes as bad as the reports imply?
The Jason Rantz Show fact checking machine says absolutely not. It's not at all true. Context is key. All the articles are citing data from the Washington Traffic Safety Commission. The AP writes, in part:
Data released Wednesday show that the number of Washington drivers involved in deadly crashes who tested positive for active marijuana doubled from 2013 to 2014 - the first year of legal marijuana sales in the state.
Wow! Doubled! How about some meaningful context?.
According to the Seattle Times, "the number of drivers involved in fatal crashes with THC in their body increased from 38 in 2013 to 75 this past year." And according to NPR, since marijuana legalization, the percentage of blood tests that contained THC increased by 33 percent!
But of those 75, the Times cites, only about half of them had active THC in them. And that increase of 33 percent? It's not exactly what you think. If you're an occasional user, THC could be found in your system four days after smoking once and that doesn't mean you're high.
Next, you can blame those 37 incidents on legal weed, I suppose, but that would be rather ignorant of the fact that legal weed stores didn't open until July of 2014 (which the Times does a good job of pointing out) and that pretty much no one was buying because the prices were high and the supplies were low. As the Times points out:
Seattle, allotted 21 stores by state officials, saw only one shop selling pot until late September. What's more, there were more marijuana-involved fatal crashes in the first half of 2014, before stores opened, than in the second half of the year.
And there's even more context. Of the 2014 samples with active THC in their system, half of those had alcohol in their system, and half of those were legally drunk.
We're not saying A equals B, said commission spokeswoman Shelly Baldwin about the link between fatal crashes and marijuana use in the Seattle Times. We're saying this is a factor. We look for trends and this is a trend we're seeing.
To be fair, some media reports are basing their headlines and shaping their coverage of this in a misleading way, and it's not the fault of this commission. But to say this is a trend? That more people have THC in their system involved in fatal crashes? Sorry, but that seems more like scare mongering masquerading as science. There's no causal relationship that they've shown (which they admit) and if there's no causal relationship, this isn't ready to be disseminated for the public to think this is meaningful.
What's most surprising is what's not often discussed, out of fear that it will send the wrong message. Driving while stoned isn't necessarily as bad as you think. According to the Washington Post
A new study from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration finds that drivers who use marijuana are at a significantly lower risk for a crash than drivers who use alcohol.
And after adjusting for age, gender, race and alcohol use, drivers who tested positive for marijuana were no more likely to crash than who had not used any drugs or alcohol prior to driving.
Remember, many of the users with THC in their system had alcohol in their system, many of which were legally drunk.And after adjusting for age, gender, race and alcohol use, drivers who tested positive for marijuana were no more likely to crash than who had not used any drugs or alcohol prior to driving.
Other studies have shown drivers who were high were hyperaware that they were high, so they ended up driving slower and more safely.
Now, this doesn't mean you should go out and get high and drive (please, don't) but it should offer you a toke of some fact-driven data, not fear mongering.
http://mynorthwest.com/992/2798995/Fact-Check-Is-marijuana-really-causing-fatal-crashes
