Fatal accidents involving stoned drivers soared in Washington since pot was legalized

[Donger]

http://money.cnn.com/2016/05/10/news...nts/index.html

Stoned driving can be as serious a problem as drunk driving.

Fatal accidents involving stoned drivers have soared in the state of Washington since marijuana was legalized there, according to a study from the AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety. But it's difficult to determine whether a high-on-pot driver is too impaired to drive, according to a separate study from the same group.

Fatal crashes involving drivers who recently used marijuana more than doubled in 2014. Pot was involved in 17% of fatal crashes in Washington in 2014, up from 8% in 2013 -- the year before recreational marijuana was allowed there.

"The significant increase in fatal crashes involving marijuana is alarming," said Peter Kissinger, CEO of the foundation, which funds scientifically rigorous studies for the drivers organization. "Washington serves as an eye-opening case study for what other states may experience with road safety after legalizing the drug."

But coming up with a test to get impaired drivers off the road will be far more difficult than the blood alcohol tests used to test for drunk drivers, according to the group. While tests show the ability to drive gets worse as blood alcohol rises, laboratory studies show the same is not necessarily true with increased levels of THC, the main chemical component in marijuana, in the blood. One driver with high levels of THC might not be impaired, while another driver with very low levels can be impaired.

"There is understandably a strong desire by both lawmakers and the public to create legal limits for marijuana impairment, in the same manner as we do with alcohol," said Marshall Doney, AAA's CEO. "In the case of marijuana, this approach is flawed and not supported by scientific research. It's simply not possible today to determine whether a driver is impaired based solely on the amount of the drug in their body."

The study was criticized by the National Cannabis Industry Association, which pointed to a different study, by the Transportation Department, which found that drivers who drivers who are drunk have a much greater increase in the risk of being in an accident than drivers who used marijuana.

"All this report really shows is that more people in Washington State are likely consuming cannabis, and thus might have some THC in their systems at the time of an accident. But since having THC in your system tells us nothing about your potential impairment, it would be like a report showing how many people involved in accidents had drunk a beer in the last week," said Taylor West, deputy director of the group.

AAA said the key result of the studies are that it's important that drivers be aware that marijuana can greatly impair driving ability.

"Whether the use of marijuana is legal or not, all motorists should avoid driving while impaired," said the group. "Just because a drug is legal does not mean it is safe to use while operating a motor vehicle. Drivers who get behind the wheel while impaired put themselves and others on the road at risk."

Another problem with testing for THC is that it requires a blood test, which can take up to two hours to be administered. That's much longer than the roadside breath tests used to test blood alcohol levels. And THC levels can decline significantly in those two hours, making results suspect.

Rather than relying on arbitrary legal limits, AAA recommends that states use a two-component system. In addition to showing a positive test for recent marijuana use, the recommended test would also measure behavioral and physiological evidence of impairment.

[-King-]

Originally Posted by Pablo

I hate this argument. It just sounds so ****ing dumb.

I'm not nearly as observant or cautious when I drive sober! Then you shouldn't drive a vehicle period.

Driving stoned or drunk are both bad decisions.

This.
Posted via Mobile Device

[Simply Red]

Originally Posted by Pablo

I hate this argument. It just sounds so ****ing dumb.

I'm not nearly as observant or cautious when I drive sober! Then you shouldn't drive a vehicle period.

Driving stoned or drunk are both bad decisions.

I disagree and agree with Travis here.

[Eleazar]

But I read on CP that it doesn't impair you

[ClevelandBronco]

It's just a natural nature plant. It's like vegetables for, like, your mind. Y'know?

[Donger]

Originally Posted by teedubya

I'm a great driver when I'm stoned. I'm actually way more observant while driving when high. I drive slower and more cautiously.

I don't ever drive drunk. That's stupid.

Well, it's not like you have well-thought out decision-making ability.

[Eleazar]

Originally Posted by DaFace

I really hope we can soon get to the point that real research can be done about this. These studies are interesting on the surface, but there are so many flaws with their approach that it's hard to make any sense of it.

That said, I do agree with their conclusion that a two-component system is necessary in order to have any chance of fairly evaluating impairment.

After that, maybe we can do some studies on the "health benefits" compared with the inevitable tidal wave of respiratory disease that is going to come out of all this.

[Katipan]

Originally Posted by Cochise

After that, maybe we can do some studies on the "health benefits" compared with the inevitable tidal wave of respiratory disease that is going to come out of all this.

On behalf of all pot smokers id like to express our deepest appreciation for this problem you keep worrying about.

But we're cool. You can stop.

http://thinkprogress.org/health/2015...-pot-research/

Even with a dearth of research, the general consensus in past decades has been that smoking marijuana regularly poses significant health risks. A new study out of Emory University in Atlanta, however, could challenge what has become the fundamental argument for maintaining the plant’s designation as a Schedule 1 drug.

“Lifetime marijuana use up to 20 joint-years is not associated with adverse changes in spirometric (exhalation strength) measures of lung health,” the study, featured in the medical journal Annals of the American Thoracic Society, concluded.

In an effort to measure marijuana’s impact on lung function, researchers used data from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Surveys to conduct a cross-sectional analysis measuring participants’ forced expiratory volume — defined as the amount of air one can forcibly exhale in one second. They found that adults between the ages of 18 and 59 who smoke one marijuana cigarette, also known as a joint, per day had the same expiratory volume as someone who didn’t partake in the plant.

The data collected suggests that it’s unlikely that prolonged marijuana use would cause respiratory diseases in a way that smoking tobacco would. While researchers at Emory University found that marijuana users who smoked joints reported coughing and having a sore throat — symptoms of bronchitis — they attributed that to the use of rolling papers, especially since those who used vaporizers reported similar problems less often.
Advertisement

The results of the Emory University study bear a striking similarity to previous research about marijuana’s effects on lung function. In 2012, government researchers found that people who smoked pot daily for seven years didn’t damage their lungs in a manner similar to that of tobacco smokers. A 2013 study conducted by Donald Tashkin, a professor at the University of California Los Angeles who has led long-term studies on the effects of tobacco inhalation, also confirmed that marijuana use alone didn’t cause significant abnormalities to the lungs.
“The distinction the Emory University study makes is not new,” Allen St. Pierre, executive director of the National Organization to

[Bump]

Originally Posted by Fish

That's a pretty important point.

the way they test for it, if you smoked 2 weeks ago and that was the last time you will most likely still test positive.

[Donger]

Originally Posted by Katipan

On behalf of all pot smokers id like to express our deepest appreciation for this problem you keep worrying about.

But we're cool. You can stop.

http://thinkprogress.org/health/2015...-pot-research/

That's neat. I wonder what the difference is. Is it just the paper?

[ClevelandBronco]

Originally Posted by Bump

the way they test for it, if you smoked 2 weeks ago and that was the last time you will most likely still test positive.

If you weren't all whacked out on mary jane like some kind of Manson family member, you might be capable of a little advance planning.

[GloucesterChief]

Originally Posted by Donger

That's neat. I wonder what the difference is. Is it just the paper?

Cigars and cigarettes have a whole bunch of additives like tar in the manufacturing process added to the tobacco which do of course harm your lungs. It is why vaping is so much safer, despite what the animists at the FDA want to believe, than smoking.

[Amnorix]

Self-driving cars are going to revolutionize everything. Not just fix drunk driving and stoned driving (if that is even a thing, really), but traffic and parking and a host of related issues.

Imagine this, because it's not so far off, potentially:

You get into your car to go to work. You can read the paper or take a nap while it takes you there. Or, instad, you want to make some extra money so you log into Uber and tell it to accept up to three passengers. The car, knowing the route it will go, diverts very slightly and picks up two passengers, earning you some extra money.

Along the way, the car automatically reroutes to avoid traffic ahead. Because it and many other cars automatically rerouted, traffic everywhere is reduced. Traffic was already reduced, of course, because so many former commuters are now using Uber or Lyft or whatever to commute, instead of driving themselves.

The car has already reserved parking space 114 at your second most-preferred garage in the city.


Some of that seems crazy, but the world is rapidly moving in that direction.

[Couch-Potato]

Originally Posted by kcfanXIII

So even the people performing the study say that THC present in the system is not an indicator of being impaired, yet they still decided to run with the headline "Fatal accidents involving stoned drivers soared in Washington since pot was legalized" ? That is tabloid journalism, that shows a clear bias to prohibitionists, and their false science.

This.

[Loneiguana]

Originally Posted by Detoxing

Paranoia in the sense that you're being overly cautious. i.e triple checking both sides at a stop sign and proceeding cautiously.....

You gonna tell me that doesn't happen to you?

And tunnel vision in the sense that you're focused and zeroed in on the cars in front of you, rather than being completely aware.

That happens to me at least. When im hella stoned.

No. I honestly don't notice a difference, for me, while driving high compared to driving sober, except that I am more likely to speed sober (never more than 10 above though).

But, pot affects me in a way that allows me to be functional. When I worked at the restuarant, I was high 90 percent of the time. Weekends, almost always smoking weed while getting the yard down, walking the dogs, running errands, ect. When in school, made the deans list showing up to class high most of the time.

I know not everyone can do that. Maybe its because I've had years of experience. But it is the one main reason I really enjoy pot as opposed to drinking, I still feel like I have control over all my actions.

I do get paranoid sometimes I guess. But I never worry about anything really, so sometimes when I smoke I worry about work stuff and is that me getting paranoid or just finally actually showing some stress? Idk.

/and I'm a straight bong smoker b/c my tolerance is too high for my pipe anymore.

[Donger]

Originally Posted by Loneiguana

No. I honestly don't notice a difference, for me, while driving high compared to driving sober

Could it be that is because you're high? Pot does impair judgment and reaction times, no?