Mobile phones

[Matt1962]

Isn't it the case that increasingly the research is showing all mobile phone use has a detrimental effect - hence the law should catch up. I quite agree enforcing the ban on hands-free use would be very difficult but it still might be worth doing as it sends the message (and I don't mean 'text'!): drivers need to concentrate on driving.

OK...For the past twenty years or so I have reasonably regularly driven 400+ mile journeys (up to Aberdeen, down to Orleans etc.) as part of my job visiting field trials amongst other things. I did these journeys (and all the other travelling I had to do) initially without a phone of any sort, then with various car kits and now with integrated Bluetooth etc. The phone, now allied with satnav etc. has improved my driving safety enormously. All technology can be distracting, but so is being lost on a farm track hundreds of miles from home.

If I am running late for a meeting I can pull over, inform people and I have no temptation to take chances to get there quicker. The most common incoming calls are those warning me of traffic problems or giving me precise directions. Maybe more than anything else I know that if someone wants to contact me urgently they can (even if I am unable to answer the call immediately).

None of the studies people have posted on this thread seem to have much relevance to the way I use my hands free phone (as I have discussed earlier) and many of the studies offend my sense of logic but that is another matter

I am a driver who concentrates on driving, and sensible, considered, 'use' of a bluetoothed mobile phone is a part of that.

[fungus]

Isn't it the case that increasingly the research is showing all mobile phone use has a detrimental effect - hence the law should catch up. I quite agree enforcing the ban on hands-free use would be very difficult but it still might be worth doing as it sends the message (and I don't mean 'text'!): drivers need to concentrate on driving.

"Drivers need to concentrate on driving."

That is exactly the point.

From an enforcement point of veiw, it would be almost imposible for a police officer to distinguish between a driver having an animated conversation on a hands free device and a driver singing along to the radio until the driver is pulled in.

Being a complete technophobe, my ancient phone sits in my pocket switched off. In that way I get a less stressfull journey. As I am now semi retired, I don't even take it out into the shed when I'm out there doing some tool restoration.

Nigel.

[Horse]

None of the studies people have posted on this thread seem to have much relevance to [me].

Even the brainscan one? How is your brain activity different?

[Matt1962]

None of the studies people have posted on this thread seem to have much relevance to [me].

Even the brainscan one? How is your brain activity different?

Different from what? At what point do these mind altering waves take effect? Is it when I cancel a call or dial back from a layby? Maybe it is during the 20 seconds or so when I let a caller know what time I will be arriving. However even though my vision is apparently reduced to looking through a postbox slit I will probably be on a deserted autoroute so might somehow manage to avoid an accident.

[martine]

OK...For the past twenty years or so I have reasonably regularly driven 400+ mile journeys (up to Aberdeen, down to Orleans etc.) as part of my job visiting field trials amongst other things. I did these journeys (and all the other travelling I had to do) initially without a phone of any sort, then with various car kits and now with integrated Bluetooth etc. The phone, now allied with satnav etc. has improved my driving safety enormously. All technology can be distracting, but so is being lost on a farm track hundreds of miles from home.

If I am running late for a meeting I can pull over, inform people and I have no temptation to take chances to get there quicker. The most common incoming calls are those warning me of traffic problems or giving me precise directions. Maybe more than anything else I know that if someone wants to contact me urgently they can (even if I am unable to answer the call immediately).

None of the studies people have posted on this thread seem to have much relevance to the way I use my hands free phone (as I have discussed earlier) and many of the studies offend my sense of logic but that is another matter

I am a driver who concentrates on driving, and sensible, considered, 'use' of a bluetoothed mobile phone is a part of that.

So if I'm reading your post correctly, the 2 situations you mention are fine by me..."pull over, inform people..." and "contact me...even if I am unable to answer the call immediately". I have no problem with these. How do they relate to using a phone while driving and as is usual, for more than a few seconds? Why did you write 'use' in quotes above?

You sound like someone in denial...but that may be me misreading your posts and if so, I apologise in advance.

[ChristianAB]

I'm going for a long trip to Italy tomorrow. So plenty of empty french autoroutes. I do this every year and unless I'm on the phone or listening to a very interesting audiobook, I tend to fall asleep. In this instance, using the phone or listening to the audiobook is helping me to stay sharp. In fact, I stopped having near-misses or near-accidents on those trips ever since I started using audiobooks.

Why is it so hard for some here to perceive the obvious: phone use is not necessarily a bad thing on the move, in the complex and multifaceted situations of real-life?

All these so-called studies are misleading in that they only scratch the visible part of the iceberg. And from a statistical perspective (I do maths for a living), they are shameleesly shambolic in their lack of rigour, as Matt pointed out in a more tactful way. They absolutely do not prove causality. that's 101 for the more logically inclined.

And then, I am to believe that we have 'valid' insight into what the brain does from such limited testing? Please! Brain science is still in its infancy,and for all intent and purposes is more akin to brain experimentation than a science (science is about predictable and repeatable results, every time, no exception). If there is one thing that is starting to come through, it's the incredible plasticity of the brain, which means that to say 'phone use is distracting' is probably just another paternalistic oversimplification of a much more nuanced reality.

And If that's not bad enough, I shall accept that this 'evidence' is sufficient for a ban? What kind of intellectually lazy shortcut is that?

Frankly, it's disappointing.

Where is the desire to delve deeper and to fully understand the facts before jumping to conclusions?

Because, at best, all of those studies indicate that poor use of phone whilst driving may correlate with a higher risk of crashing, which is useless in itself (poor use of anything is dangerous), unless we get a much more precise, detailed and sound understanding of the entire phenomenon. But then again, this should be obvious.

[Matt1962]

OK...For the past twenty years or so I have reasonably regularly driven 400+ mile journeys (up to Aberdeen, down to Orleans etc.) as part of my job visiting field trials amongst other things. I did these journeys (and all the other travelling I had to do) initially without a phone of any sort, then with various car kits and now with integrated Bluetooth etc. The phone, now allied with satnav etc. has improved my driving safety enormously. All technology can be distracting, but so is being lost on a farm track hundreds of miles from home.

If I am running late for a meeting I can pull over, inform people and I have no temptation to take chances to get there quicker. The most common incoming calls are those warning me of traffic problems or giving me precise directions. Maybe more than anything else I know that if someone wants to contact me urgently they can (even if I am unable to answer the call immediately).

None of the studies people have posted on this thread seem to have much relevance to the way I use my hands free phone (as I have discussed earlier) and many of the studies offend my sense of logic but that is another matter

I am a driver who concentrates on driving, and sensible, considered, 'use' of a bluetoothed mobile phone is a part of that.

So if I'm reading your post correctly, the 2 situations you mention are fine by me..."pull over, inform people..." and "contact me...even if I am unable to answer the call immediately". I have no problem with these. How do they relate to using a phone while driving and as is usual, for more than a few seconds? Why did you write 'use' in quotes above?

You sound like someone in denial...but that may be me misreading your posts and if so, I apologise in advance.

I don't think I am in denial (is this an oxymoron ?). To me 'use' means having a phone connected to the car systems. In quotes because it might mean other things to other people.

The main value of this is that I can see if anyone is trying to contact me (and normally who that person is).

I have an option to answer the call immediately and will freely confess to occasionally doing this. HOWEVER this is only after a decision process involving both driving information/actions and who the caller is. The latter is important because I can filter out calls that I know are not likely to be straightforward. Calls I do tend to answer immediately (after the 'IPS' part of the system + any action I see fit) would be from my wife - domestic matters taking seconds to answer or from someone connected with the journey I am on - these calls are likely to improve my safety (in my opinion), as I think my driving is more compromised by being lost and late, than listening to (brief) directions or warnings from a phone call.

I should probably point out that I don't have that many calls, and of these, few are answered immediately (maybe averaging one every three weeks, looking back).

The point with which I definitely am in denial is all the brain activity type research. I can accept that it is possible to be so completely engaged in a phone call that other activities suffer dramatically (and studies can easily replicate this). However anyone who has ever done some other activity in the office whilst vaguely listening in to a phone call must surely realise that it is equally possible to carry out another activity to the detriment of the phone call.

[sussex2]

I'm going for a long trip to Italy tomorrow. So plenty of empty french autoroutes. I do this every year and unless I'm on the phone or listening to a very interesting audiobook, I tend to fall asleep. In this instance, using the phone or listening to the audiobook is helping me to stay sharp. In fact, I stopped having near-misses or near-accidents on those trips ever since I started using audiobooks.

Why is it so hard for some here to perceive the obvious: phone use is not necessarily a bad thing on the move, in the complex and multifaceted situations of real-life?

All these so-called studies are misleading in that they only scratch the visible part of the iceberg. And from a statistical perspective (I do maths for a living), they are shameleesly shambolic in their lack of rigour, as Matt pointed out in a more tactful way. They absolutely do not prove causality. that's 101 for the more logically inclined.

And then, I am to believe that we have 'valid' insight into what the brain does from such limited testing? Please! Brain science is still in its infancy,and for all intent and purposes is more akin to brain experimentation than a science (science is about predictable and repeatable results, every time, no exception). If there is one thing that is starting to come through, it's the incredible plasticity of the brain, which means that to say 'phone use is distracting' is probably just another paternalistic oversimplification of a much more nuanced reality.

And If that's not bad enough, I shall accept that this 'evidence' is sufficient for a ban? What kind of intellectually lazy shortcut is that?

Frankly, it's disappointing.

Where is the desire to delve deeper and to fully understand the facts before jumping to conclusions?

Because, at best, all of those studies indicate that poor use of phone whilst driving may correlate with a higher risk of crashing, which is useless in itself (poor use of anything is dangerous), unless we get a much more precise, detailed and sound understanding of the entire phenomenon. But then again, this should be obvious.

I am bemused by your first paragraph as having driven many times a year, for years, between southern England and Catalunya I have never felt that I may fall asleep or doze off.
Would you expand a little on this please?
Would you please

[exportmanuk]

Last night on the way home I observed a motorscooter ( 125 Twist & go) being ridden a little worse than I normally expect. As I caught up with the young fellow I realised the problem, he was texting, phone ins left hand whilst riding and attempting to control the bike with his right. The scrote had no number plate either. Probably should have been displaying L plates too.

Where is Darwin when he is needed.

[akirk]

Where is Darwin when he is needed.

probably chasing the 3 series I saw today going back to my car at the petrol station - NSL road alongside - long, straight, fast, but 20 yards from the petrol station roadworks and the light had gone red - he was on the phone, and to give him credit rather than drive into the car in front which was stopping and which he clearly hadn't noticed, he overtook and drove through the red lights mmm

Alasdair