Badmovies.org Forum

Source: http://www.nydailynews.com/ny_local/2009/07/19/2009-07-19_eatdrive_sure_recipe_for_a_crash.html

Have you been guilty of eating and driving?

I find 80% to be a hardly believable number. 
I've been driving for 32 years now, and I eat behind the wheel (and talk on my
cell phone) pretty regularly.  I have only had one serious accident in 32 years,
and it was caused by neither (I was changing a radio station, actually).  I do
think, however, that texting while driving is pure idiocy.

okay, just how does one drink soup while driving?

as for you Indy, I firmly agree that texting while driving is pure idiotic, esp. when now there's laws that prohibit texting while driving, yet most teens- 29 would hide their phones, INCREASING the chances of an accident. :hatred: this is why I put my phone on silent when I'm driving. :teddyr:

Lipton's Cup o' Soup.  I actually like them for a quick lunch.  MMMMMM, tomato.  More seriously though, I think the 80% is a bit far fetched.  It seems much higher then I would place.  As one mentioned, I think changing the radio station and such activities produce more then 20%.  It seems more like a "get the food out of your face fatty" kind of study to help eliminate obesity in America. 

Sounds like a Fox News statistic.

-Jimmybob

No links to the original study. The "National Highway Traffic Safety Administration" has a website that is a morass of non-information. That 80% number is not looking too good. I'm of the philosophy that when you're driving you should be spending your time driving, but 80%? All due to food? Not likely.

(http://www.smbc-comics.com/comics/20101201.gif)

Gotta agree with the 'Smith on this one. The number is far fetched, and even so, texting is pure lunacy.  Both hands on the wheel, and nowhere else.   If I have to talk on a phone, I dial the number, and clip the phone to my seat belt, or my shirt collar.

It's still hands-free and involves little or no interaction with the phone itself.

How about drinking and driving?

I have a cup holder next to my seat in the car, and I always keep a couple bottles of bottled water there, for when I get thirsty, but I never drink, when I drive. I've been in enough accidents, both my fault and others. I've seen enough accidents. And I've seen enough near misses, both my fault and others. And you mix those in with the bicyclists and the joggers, who are as bad or almost as bad as the drivers, and then you add in the pedestrians, when in downtown, who are as bad or almost as bad as the bicyclists and the joggers, that the one thing you don't want to do, where I live, is to do anything except concentrate on your own driving plus watch out for everyone else.

So, if I take a swig from the bottle of bottled water in the car, I wait till I'm stopped at a red light.

That's actually an unfortunate misconception, not helped much by the media or even the laws of certain states.  The big problem with talking on the cell phone while driving is one of distraction, not using up a hand (people actually drive quite well with one hand these days, and the big issue is usually reaction time more than dodging).  In fact, using hands free talking makes a statistically insignificant difference in driving ability compared to driving while on the phone and driving while not on the phone at all.  Talking to a passenger also has much less effect for some reason - it's not clear why exactly, actually - maybe because they're in the car with you they know when to be quiet. 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mobile_phones_and_driving_safety#Handsfree_device (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mobile_phones_and_driving_safety#Handsfree_device)

But yes, states that require hands free talking on the cell phones are accomplishing nothing besides maybe raising ticket revenue. 

As far as this statistic...  Sounds made up to me.  I'd be curious to know how they define "cause" in this case - if you're eating or drinking and get in an accident, do they automatically assume that was the reason?  If so, that'd explain it.  Kind of like how if you've ever drank and get liver cancer, or ever smoked and get lung cancer, some statistics automatically put you in as related to those, even if you drank the equivalent of two bottles of wine 30 years earlier or smoked a few packs in high school and never again - it's kind of spurious. 

There's no link to the study, so we can't really figure that one out.

Well, we all know the media never helps promote anything unless it's something that they agree with or when they need to stir up a hornet's nest just for ratings purposes..

You do bring up a good point about distraction- to add to it, a lot of it can be emotional while driving and talking (such as a parent fighting with child or a husband with his wife) and in that way can also be a catalyst in such accidents involving cellphones, regardless of being hands-free or not.

Your emotional state can affect your reaction time as well.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mobile_phones_and_driving_safety#Handsfree_device (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mobile_phones_and_driving_safety#Handsfree_device)



I'd say that's a fair shot too..if you live in New Jersey, 'Nuff said. Almost every law is a moneymaker.



Kind of like how some groups of people automatically associated all listeners of heavy metal (like myself) with being devil worshippers, or saying that guys with long hair are all druggies.  I remember those ones very well from personal experience, lol

80%?  Yeah right, sounds like someone is trying throw people off the texting trail if you ask me.