XPost: comp.mobile.android, comp.mobile.ipad
From: YourName@YourISP.com
In article
<89b7c$53115149$43da7656$5078@nntpswitch.blueworldhosting.com>, Liam
O'Connor wrote:
> On Sat, 01 Mar 2014 15:46:14 +1300, Your Name wrote:
>
> > What is in no doubt is that many accidents have been proven to be
> > caused by a driver using their cellphone, or any other unneccessary
> > distraction.
>
> If that presumably logical assumption is true, then we *must* see
> a correspondingly similar curve in increased accidents following
> the curve of cellphone adoption.
>
> If we don't see a simialr curve, and if we can't find a mitigating
> factor, then we just as surely *must* assume cellphone use is not
> causing increased accidents.
It's pretty much a guaratee that you're not going to get such a curve
and there's no way to realistically prove anything along these lines.
There's far too many factors which can hide the true figures - a
growing number of cars, accidents not reported, people who lie about
using the cellphone and get away with it, growing number of people who
obey the laws (where applicable) or choose not to use a cellphone,
improved car safety systems (meaning less actual accidents, but more
unreported "near misses"), etc., etc. Potentially the number of
accidents directly and easily attributable to cellphone use could even
be lower than it was because of these factors rather than using a
cellphone while driving actually being "safe".
As a silly example, if 10 years ago there were 80 cellphone using
drivers and they all had one accident because of using the phone, then
that would be 80 accidents / 100% of all drivers. If now there are 800
drivers, but only 80 of them use the cellphone while driving and have
one accident because of using the phone ... it's still 80 accidents,
but only 10% of all drivers OR 100% of all cellphone using drivers ...
so it's either less than or equal to the past figure, so there is no
"curve" or provable "increase", but the number of possible accidents
had more of those other 90% of drivers decided to use their cellphone
can't be known.
That's why I said the only thing you can prove is that cellphone use
while driving is *definitely* the cause of *some* accidents. There have
also been studies in driving simulations and safety test tracks that
show using the cellphone does distract drivers from fully concentrating
on the road.
Is cellphone using while driving the cause of more accidents than
someone having a heart attack while driving (for example)? Who knows,
and is unprovable and largely irrelevant - you can't stop someone
having a heart attack, but you can (at least try to) stop them using a
cellphone, putting on make-up, etc. while driving.
The less potential and preventable dangers there are, the better it is
for everyone on the road.
> Does anyone have figures for accidents trending cell phone adoption?
>
> If not, what you're really saying is that the same people who
> have accidents using cellphones would have had accidents anyway.
>
> I, myself, have never had an accident in my life, although I've
> had a claim for someone hitting my car when it was parked. And, I
> use my cellphone all the time. Of course, that's a study of one,
> and perhaps a statistic waiting to occur, but, in the aggregate,
> if cellphone use is causing accidents, then we MUST see a curve
> of increased accidents trending the same line as cellphone use.
>
> Do we?
Some people smoke for their entire lives and never have any real health
issues attributable to smoking, but that doesn't prove smoking is not
unhealthy. Some people can fall off a cliff and survive while others
die falling off a chair. It simply proves some people are luckier then
others, ... or at least luckier *so far*.
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
