Death on the roads: Article lacks logic

doi:10.1136/bmj.333.7560.199

BMJ 2006;333:199 (22 July), doi:10.1136/bmj.333.7560.199

Letter

Death on the roads

Article lacks logic

The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below.

EDITOR—Walker et al show convincingly that drivers andother occupants of heavy four wheel drive vehicles are saferin crashes than those in smaller or lighter vehicles and thoseon foot or cycle.¹ They also show that drivers of these vehiclesuse mobile phones more often and seat belts less often thandrivers of other cars.

But by conflating mobile phone use (which distracts drivers)and non-use of seat belts (which makes drivers feel less safe)as equally important examples of illegal and dangerous practicesthey have sown confusion and undermined the prospect of a constructiveapproach to road safety.

View larger version (54K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

Using mobile phones and not using seatbelts have opposing consequencesfor other road users. The distraction caused by mobile phonesincreases the threat to others, but the non-use of seat beltsdecreases it. As the authors note, deaths of pedestrians, cyclists,and rear seat passengers increased (by 8%, . . . [Full text of this article]

John Adams, emeritus professor

Department of Geography, University College London, London WC1E 6BT John.Adams@UCL.ac.uk

CiteULike

Complore

Connotea

Del.icio.us Add to Digg

Digg

Technorati What's this?

Unsafe driving behaviour and four wheel drive vehicles: observational study: Lesley Walker, Jonathan Williams, and Konrad Jamrozik
BMJ 2006 333: 71. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]