Comment: Um...

(See in situ)


"If this trend continues, in five or six years non-alcohol drugs will overtake alcohol to become the most common substance involved in deaths related to impaired driving."

What kind of sentence is that?! "non-alcohol drugs" isn't "A"'s MANY kinds of substances.

Why would marijuana be lumped in with other non-alcohol drugs? Why not lump alcohol into a category called "non-marijuana drugs" and compare that category to marijuana?

Five or six years? Well, which is it: five or six? Following data trends doesn't give you a result of "five or six years" gives you a result of either 5 or 6 years.

Furthermore, if you actually look at the data they provide and project into the future and so some simple arithmetic, it comes to exactly 11.00 years before "non-alcohol drugs" will cause the same number of deaths as alcohol.

Lastly, and most importantly, the entire premise is bogus. You don't determine how much marijuana influences traffic deaths by measuring whether or not more or fewer drivers who die from traffic have marijuana in their system. That would be like saying "owning an ipad dramatically increases your likelihood to die in a traffic accident", because the percentage of people dead in 2010 who own ipads is astronomically higher than the percent in 1999 who died.

To determine marijuana's effect on traffic safety, you need to actually run a controlled experiment that isolates the variable of marijuana in a sample of people, and see if the marijuana smokers are more or less likely to cause traffic deaths (with all other variables like drinking, driving skill, age, gender, etc. kept constant).