On Sun, 16 Aug 2015 22:49:38 +0000 (UTC), ceg
wrote:
Overall accident statistics for the USA are very reliable, since they are
reported by police, insurance companies, and by individuals.
Most people lie on accident reports to avoid potential complications
with insurance payments. For example, few will admit that it was
their fault when the traffic policeman is standing there just waiting
for a confession and to deliver an expensive ticket.
Anecdote time. While going to medical skool, a doctor friend worked
in the coroners office of a large city. Like all large cities, the
coroners office had a steady stream of deadbeats, bums, winos, and
homeless that arrived without the benefit of medical attention and
records. Not wanting to spend the money on an autopsy and a medical
examiner, they quietly guessed at the cause of death with fairly good
accuracy. However, after a few embarrassing mistakes, that was deemed
unacceptable. Causes unknown were also not a viable option. So, they
inscribed "heart failure" on all such cases, which was certainly true,
but not necessarily the cause of death. That actually worked well for
a few years, until someone ran statistics on what appeared to be a
heart disease epidemic centered in this large city. The city now
requires either an attending physician report or a mandatory autopsy.
While I'm not in a position to prove or demonstrate this, I think
you'll find that such "accident" reports are highly opinionated, are
skewed in the direction of smallest settlements, and are rarely
corrected.
The numbers are high enough, and consistent enough, to make the error
only a very small percentage.
Right. Big numbers are more accurate.
The theory is that given a sufficiently large number of independent
studies, the errors will be equally distributed on both sides of a
desired result, and therefore cancel. That has worked well for global
warming predictions. Unfortunately, the studies have to be
independent to qualify and does not work at reducing the distribution
in a single study.
You won't get *better* data that the census bureau data on accidents in
the USA by state - and none are showing what we'd expect.
OMG! Do you really trust the government to do anything correctly? I
wish I had your confidence and less personal experience. I'll spare
you another anecdote illustrating the problem at the city level.
Hence the paradox.
Where are the accidents?
Ok, think about it. You've just crashed your car into an immovable
object while texting. You're still conscious and on an adrenalin
high. The police are on their way and the last thing you need is for
them to find your smartphone on the floor of the vehicle. So, you
make a phone call to your wife telling her you'll be late for dinner
and by the way, you've decided to buy her a new car. The police walk
up, ask you a few questions, and notice you talking on the cell phone.
If you're cooperative, nothing happens. If you're a total jerk, the
mention the cell phone in their report, and you get nailed for
possibly talking/texting while driving. You're screwed if they
confiscate the phone for forensic analysis or request a call record
from you provider.
In short, the statisics are where they want them. If there's a
political or financial benefit to showing huge numbers of talk/text
driving accidents, they will magically appear. If they thing that
nobody really cares about the numbers, you will have a difficult time
finding them. If the numbers accumulate some academic interest, you
will see the same wrong information repeated endlessly in statistical
surveys and college dissertations. Everyone lies, but that's ok
because nobody listens. Incidentally, 87.3% of all statistics are
fabricated for the occasion.
--
Jeff Liebermann
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060
http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558