Marijuana & Driving A
Deadly Combination
By Mike Bockoven
The Grand Island Independent - Nebraska
11-12-3
"In 2001, 34.7 percent of high school students in
Nebraska reported using marijuana, with 5.8 percent using it before the
age of 13. Nationally, 38,000 high school students reported that they crashed
while driving under the influence of marijuana in 2001."
The Drug Recognition Experts of the Grand Island Police
Department are trained to recognize the effects of drugs on a person. Of
the 18 traffic stops the seven officers have made this year in which a
person was driving under the influence of one or more drugs, all have something
in common.
"Marijuana has been a component in all of them,"
Sgt. Dale Hildebrandt said. "Oftentimes it's a poly-drug situation
where the person is on more than one, but all of them included marijuana."
Preconceptions aside, marijuana slows reaction time,
makes it harder to concentrate and generally has the same effects as alcohol
on driving, Hildebrandt said. While there have been only 18 stops this
year, considering the number of DREs in proportion to the number of stops,
Hildebrandt said it's definitely an issue in Grand Island.
The White House Office of National Drug Control Policy
agrees. The organization started the "Steer Clear of Pot," campaign
in September aimed at informing young people of the dangers of driving
under the influence. The program is nationwide, but Brian Blake, a spokesperson
for the ONDCP, said it's a battle that needs to be fought on a local and
national level.
"For the past year the administration has been trying
to educate the public about marijuana and driving," he said. "The
problem is people have had 'don't drink and drive' pounded into their heads
for 20 years. We need to do the same thing with marijuana, from the schoolhouse
to the statehouse."
Given some of the statistics on the issue, it appears
as if Blake has a point. In 2001, 34.7 percent of high school students
in Nebraska reported using marijuana, with 5.8 percent using it before
the age of 13. Nationally, 38,000 high school students reported that they
crashed while driving under the influence of marijuana in 2001.
The culture tells children that a high driver poses little
threat, Blake said. Getting the contrary message out to youths is an important
thing to do, given the number using the drug.
"There's definitely a problem out there," Blake
said. "Marijuana and driving is something we felt wasn't being touched
on."
Blake said for more information, parents or youths can
go to www.TheAntiDrug.com.
Another reason to get the message to every school, DMV
and driving instructor in the country, Blake said, is that teens are still
learning the rules of the road most times. Throwing marijuana into the
mix usually is dangerous.
Hildebrandt said a good number of those pulled over for
driving under the influence of a drug other than alcohol are youths, and
educating them about the dangers is never a bad idea. In his experience,
youths under the influence are usually unaware of the problem driving on
a drug presents.
"Most of them, if you ask, will tell you they're
high," he said. "They shrug their shoulders and ask, 'What's
the big deal? It's just pot.'"
That attitude is a big part of the problem, Hildebrandt
said. While their numbers aren't going through the roof, those driving
under the influence of marijuana often constitute an accident waiting to
happen.
"It's prevalent," he said. "We have goals
of educating more officers, but educating the public is also good."
Right, a "poly-drug situation". Did you catch that? That's a
fancy way of saying these kids were blitzed on something truly 'narcotic'
(hell, you aren't even supposed to operate heavy machinery when taking
COUGH SYRUP!!!!) or our old friend Mr. ALCOHOL. They were DRUNK, one way
or another. Not merely "high" on marijuana, which has no effect
whatsoever on ones ability to operate a motor vehicle, operate machinery
(heavy or otherwise) or deal with cross-word puzzles, tie ones shoes or
speak coherently! Once again we see the slick bogus bullcrap of the establishment
carefully protecting its precious oracle of lies. Why do kids say "it's
JUST pot"? Because they know! They use it! They've been drunk, they've
been high, the know the difference and when Mr. Law Enforcement DEA dorkus
refers to marijuana as a "narcotic" or speaks of being "intoxicated"
on grass or suggests the devil weed will steer your vehicle into the dark
abyss of hell they just laugh and fire up another doobie and get happily,
blissfully, calmly toasted. They know everything they are told is bullcrap.
It is these very small lies that start the chain of utter mistrust in young
people -- if they lie about pot and its effects, then maybe they're also
lying about cocaine... about acid.... about ecstasy... about everything.
I once attended a drug lecture at a karate school where some black belt
moron told a bunch of 10 year olds that he knew a heroin addict who shot
up so many times his arm just dropped off one day, and another person he
knew took one puff of pot and has been in the state hospital out of his
mind ever since. When will the absurdity of "Refer Madness" end,
and rational drug education begin? And, decriminalization of drug use as
well!?! Our prisons are overflowing with drug users/addicts -- people who
need help, not incarceration. The only reason the heroin addict is a threat
to me is because the system makes his addiction a crime, so he has to turn
to crime to meet his illegal needs. We need to start by getting real about
pot with the people, and knock off the nonsense. Marijuana could probably
bail out this nation as a cash crop. Hemp (the variety of cannabis that
won't get you high but can be used to make everything from rope to clothing)
alone could probably do that. Our whole country would probably benefit
if the majority of people got high instead of belting back liquids more
suited for clearning car parts, turning their brains into rubber and their
livers into premature patté.
Comment
From Christopher
11-12-3
Why are the "drugs are bad, m'kay" crowd so
ignored? Maybe because they refuse to use science. Instead of actual science,
the narks just say, "everyone knows this is dangerous/bad/evil. Pro-Freedom
types wind up having to only use science to defend themselves, though they
usually get drowned out by the government amplified lies. Compare the nebraska
article to this page from the National Orginization for the Reform of Marijuana
Laws:
http://www.norml.org/index.cfm?Group_ID=5450
Marijuana and Driving: A Review of the Scientific Evidence
It is well-established that alcohol increases accident
risk. Evidence of marijuana's culpability in on-road driving accidents
is much less convincing.
Although cannabis intoxication has been shown to mildly
impair psychomotor skills, this impairment does not appear to be severe
or long lasting. In driving simulator tests, this impairment is typically
manifested by subjects decreasing their driving speed and requiring greater
time to respond to emergency situations.
Nevertheless, this impairment does not appear to play
a significant role in on-road traffic accidents. A 2002 review of seven
separate studies involving 7,934 drivers reported, "Crash culpability
studies have failed to demonstrate that drivers with cannabinoids in the
blood are significantly more likely than drug-free drivers to be culpable
in road crashes. This result is likely because subject under the influence
of marijuana are aware of their impairment and compensate for it accordingly,
such as by slowing down and by focusing their attention when they know
a response will be required. This reaction is just the opposite of that
exhibited by drivers under the influence of alcohol, who tend to drive
in a more risky manner proportional to their intoxication.
Today, a large body of research exists exploring the
impact of marijuana on psychomotor skills and actual driving performance.
This research consists of driving simulator studies, on-road performance
studies, crash culpability studies, and summary reviews of the existing
evidence. To date, the result of this research is fairly consistent: Marijuana
has a measurable yet relatively mild effect on psychomotor skills, yet
it does not appear to play a significant role in vehicle crashes, particularly
when compared to alcohol. Below is a summary of some of the existing data.
(For more information on NORML's position regarding marijuana, driving
and the law, please click here or visit NORML's Principles of Responsible
Cannabis Use.)
"At the present time, the evidence to suggest an
involvement of cannabis in road crashes is scientifically unproven.
To date , seven studies using culpability analysis have
been reported, involving a total of 7,934 drivers. Alcohol was detected
as the only drug in 1,785 drivers, and together with cannabis in 390 drivers.
Cannabis was detected in 684 drivers, and in 294 of these it was the only
drug detected.
The results to date of crash culpability studies have
failed to demonstrate that drivers with cannabinoids in the blood are significantly
more likely than drug-free drivers to be culpable in road crashes. [In]
cases in which THC was the only drug present were analyzed, the culpability
ratio was found to be not significantly different from the no-drug group.
REFERENCE: G. Chesher and M. Longo. 2002. Cannabis and
alcohol in motor vehicle accidents. In: F. Grotenhermen and E. Russo (Eds.)
Cannabis and Cannabinoids: Pharmacology, Toxicology, and Therapeutic Potential.
New York: Haworth Press. Pp. 313-323.
"Cannabis leads to a more cautious style of driving,
[but] it has a negative impact on decision time and trajectory. [However,]
this in itself does not mean that drivers under the influence of cannabis
represent a traffic safety risk. Cannabis alone, particularly in low doses,
has little effect on the skills involved in automobile driving.
REFERENCE: Canadian Senate Special Committee on Illegal
Drugs. 2002. Cannabis: Summary Report: Our Position for a Canadian Public
Policy. Ottawa. Chapter 8: Driving Under the Influence of Cannabis.
"This report has summarized available research on
cannabis and driving.
Evidence of impairment from the consumption of cannabis
has been reported by studies using laboratory tests, driving simulators
and on-road observation. ... Both simulation and road trials generally
find that driving behavior shortly after consumption of larger doses of
cannabis results in (i) a more cautious driving style; (ii) increased variability
in lane position (and headway); and (iii) longer decision times. Whereas
these results indicate a 'change' from normal conditions, they do not necessarily
reflect 'impairment' in terms of performance effectiveness since few studies
report increased accident risk.
REFERENCE: UK Department of Environment, Transport and
the Regions (Road Safety Division). 2000. Cannabis and Driving: A Review
of the Literature and Commentary. Crowthorne, Berks: TRL Limited.
"Overall, we conclude that the weight of the evidence
indicates that:
1) There is no evidence that consumption of cannabis
alone increases the risk of culpability for traffic crash fatalities or
injuries for which hospitalization occurs, and may reduce those risks.
2) The evidence concerning the combined effect of cannabis and alcohol
on the risk of traffic fatalities and injuries, relative to the risk of
alcohol alone, is unclear. 3) It is not possible to exclude the possibility
that the use of cannabis (with or without alcohol) leads to an increased
risk of road traffic crashes causing less serious injuries and vehicle
damage.
REFERENCE: M. Bates and T. Blakely. 1999. "Role
of cannabis in motor vehicle crashes. Epidemiologic Reviews 21: 222-232.
"In conclusion, marijuana impairs driving behavior.
However, this impairment is mitigated in that subjects under marijuana
treatment appear to perceive that they are indeed impaired. Where they
can compensate, they do, for example by not overtaking, by slowing down
and by focusing their attention when they know a response will be required.
Effects on driving behavior are present up to an hour after smoking but
do not continue for extended periods.
With respect to comparisons between alcohol and marijuana
effects, these substances tend to differ in their effects. In contrast
to the compensatory behavior exhibited by subjects under marijuana treatment,
subjects who have received alcohol tend to drive in a more risky manner.
Both substances impair performance; however, the more cautious behavior
of subjects who have received marijuana decreases the impact of the drug
on performance, whereas the opposite holds true for alcohol.
REFERENCE: A. Smiley. 1999. Marijuana: On-Road and Driving-Simulator
Studies. In: H. Kalant et al. (Eds) The Health Effects of Cannabis. Toronto:
Center for Addiction and Mental Health. Pp. 173-191.
"Intoxication with cannabis leads to a slight impairment
of psychomotor function. [However,] the impairment in driving skills does
not appear to be severe, even immediately after taking cannabis, when subjects
are tested in a driving simulator. This may be because people intoxicated
by cannabis appear to compensate for their impairment by taking fewer risks
and driving more slowly, whereas alcohol tends to encourage people to take
great risks and drive more aggressively.
REFERENCE: UK House of Lords Select Committee on Science
and Technology. 1998. Ninth Report. London: United Kingdom. Chapter 4:
Section 4.7.
"The evidence suggests that marijuana presents a
real, but secondary safety risk; and that alcohol is the leading drug-related
accident risk factor.
REFERENCES: D. Gieringer. 1988. Marijuana, driving, and
accident safety. Journal of Psychoactive Drugs 20: 93-101.
CRASH CULPABILITY STUDIES
"For each of 2,500 injured drivers presenting to
a hospital, a blood sample was collected for later analysis.
There was a clear relationship between alcohol and culpability.
In contrast, there was no significant increase in culpability for cannabinoids
alone. While a relatively large number of injured drivers tested positive
for cannabinoids, culpability rates were no higher than those for the drug
free group. This is consistent with other findings.
REFERENCE: C. Hunter et al. 1998. The Prevalence and
Role of Alcohol, Cannabinoids, Benzodiazepines and Stimulants in Non-Fatal
Crashes. Adelaide: South Australia: Forensic Science, Department for Administration
and Information Services.
"Blood samples from 894 patients presenting to two
Emergency Departments for treatment of motor vehicle injur[ies] were tested
for alcohol and other drugs.
Based on alcohol and drug testing of the full range of
patients alcohol is clearly the major drug associated with serious crashes
and greater injury. Patients testing positive for illicit drugs (marijuana,
opiates, and cocaine), in the absence of alcohol, were in crashes very
similar to those of patients with neither alcohol nor drugs. When other
relevant variables were considered, these drugs were not associated with
more severe crashes or greater injury.
REFERENCE: P. Waller et al. 1997. Crash characteristics
and injuries of victims impaired by alcohol versus illicit drugs. Accident
Analysis and Prevention 29: 817-827.
"Blood specimens were collected from a sample of
1,882 drivers from 7 states, during 14 months in the years 1990 and 1991.
The sample comprised operators of passenger cars, trucks, and motorcycles
who died within 4 hours of their crash.
While cannabinoids were detected in 7 percent of the
drivers, the psychoactive agent THC was found in only 4 percent. The THC-only
drivers had a responsibility rate below that of the drugfree drivers. While
the difference was not statistically significant, there was no indication
that cannabis by itself was a cause of fatal crashes.
REFERENCE: K. Terhune. 1992. The incidence and role of
drugs in fatally injured drivers. Washington, DC: US Department of Transportation
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Report No. DOT HS 808 065.
ON-ROAD PERFORMANCE STUDIES
"Marijuana's effects on actual driving performance
were assessed in a series of three studies wherein dose-effect relationships
were measured in actual driving situations that progressively approached
reality.
THC's effects on road-tracking after doses up to 300
µg/kg never exceeded alcohol's at bacs of 0.08%; and, were in no
way unusual compared to many medicinal drugs. Yet, THC's effects differ
qualitatively from many other drugs, especially alcohol. Evidence from
the present and previous studies strongly suggests that alcohol encourages
risky driving whereas THC encourages greater caution, at least in experiments.
Another way THC seems to differ qualitatively from many other drugs is
that the formers users seem better able to compensate for its adverse effects
while driving under the influence.
REFERENCE: H. Robbe. 1995. Marijuana's effects on actual
driving performance. In: C. Kloeden and A. McLean (Eds) Alcohol, Drugs
and Traffic Safety T-95. Adelaide: Australia: HHMRC Road Research Unit,
University of Adelaide. Pp. 11-20.
"This report concerns the effects of marijuana smoking
on actual driving performance. This program of research has shown that
marijuana, when taken alone, produces a moderate degree of driving impairment
which is related to consumed THC dose. The impairment manifests itself
mainly in the ability to maintain a lateral position on the road, but its
magnitude is not exceptional in comparison with changes produced by many
medicinal drugs and alcohol. Drivers under the influence of marijuana retain
insight in their performance and will compensate when they can, for example,
by slowing down or increasing effort. As a consequence, THC's adverse effects
on driving performance appear relatively small.
REFERENCE: W. Hindrik and J. Robbe and J. O,Hanlon. 1993.
Marijuana and actual driving performance. Washington, DC: US Department
of Transportation National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Report
No. DOT HS 808 078.
TABULATED SUMMARY OF ROAD TRIALS OF CANNABIS AND DRIVING
Table compiled by the UK Department of Transport (2000)
DRIVING SIMULATOR STUDIES
"Overall, it is possible to conclude that cannabis
has a measurable effect on psychomotor performance, particularly tracking
ability. Its effect on higher cognitive functions, for example divided
attention tasks associated with driving, appear not to be as critical.
Drivers under the influence of cannabis seem aware that they are impaired,
and attempt to compensate for this impairment by reducing the difficulty
of the driving task, for example by driving more slowly. In terms of road
safety, it cannot be concluded that driving under the influence of cannabis
is not a hazard, as the effects of various aspects of driver performance
are unpredictable. However, in comparison with alcohol, the severe effects
of alcohol on the higher cognitive processes of driving are likely to make
this more of a hazard, particularly at higher blood alcohol levels.
REFERENCE: B. Sexton et al. 2000. The influence of cannabis
on driving: A report prepared for the UK Department of the Environment,
Transport and the Regions (Road Safety Division). Crowthorne, Berks: TRL
Limited.
TABULATED SUMMARY OF SIMULATOR STUDIES OF CANNABIS AND
DRIVING Table compiled by the UK Department of Transport (2000)
Comment
From SH
11-12-3
Well here we go again. More negative press for cannabis
here.
Now, I'm not recommending that anyone go get baked and
drive around. But, I'm not going to lie to you (Rense.com is the place
for truth, right?), I've driven all over the country in virtually every
driving condition while under the influence of cannabis. I have never been
in an accident. When I was younger and lived in an extremely boring town,
that's all we would do. Go out to the country, listen to music, fire up
a joint and just cruise. It's an extremely common thing.
In my twenties I would smoke a little herb on my way
to class every morning. Even in these Northern winters. My accountant friend
Jennifer takes a few tokes in her car on the way to and from work daily.
She's never caused an accident. Let's not be fooled into thinking smoking
marijuana is the same as downing a six pack.
