12

Some support that driving while under the influence of marijuana is safer than driving when drunk, saying that people who drive high always drive at slower speeds so even if they cause an accident, it's a much safer one.

Has any research been done on this?

This article states:

Evidence suggests we may not have as much to fear from stoned driving as from drunken driving. Some researchers say that limited resources are better applied to continuing to reduce drunken driving. Stoned driving, they say, is simply less dangerous.

How much of this is true? What evidence exists?

Anko - inactive in protest
  • 1,991
  • 2
  • 18
  • 29
John Demetriou
  • 357
  • 3
  • 12
  • 3
    I read some government statistics (in the USA, I think) that tentatively supported this claim, but because statistics on marijuana usage was not reliably gathered by all law enforcement agencies, it was hard to draw firm conclusions. As I recall, the most reliable data available for pot-related accidents were for accidents where *both* pot *and* alcohol were involved, obviously skewing the data. – Flimzy Jan 15 '15 at 04:56
  • Highly related question, where the answers mostly answer this question: [Does marijuana impair driving?](https://skeptics.stackexchange.com/q/17407/38242) – ShadowRanger Nov 22 '22 at 17:46

1 Answers1

9

Marijuana, alcohol and actual driving performance found that a 0.04 g/dL alcohol concentration resulted in minor impairment, while 200 mg/kg THC resulted in moderate impairment, and the two combined even at lower doses resulted in the most severe impairment.

It really depends on what dose you're trying to compare.

jmabs
  • 622
  • 7
  • 8
  • 1
    Well let's say one weed cigarette vs the slightly above the legal ratio of alcohol consuming – John Demetriou Jan 18 '15 at 07:38
  • 2
    @JohnDemetriou because marijuana is still largely illegal, its growth is unregulatted, making it impossible to say what the exact dose for any given joint is. Different subspecies of cannabis have different concentrations of THC and there is no organization around (yet) to organize that kind of information. That's going to make it hard to put solid numbers behind your question. – KutuluMike Jan 18 '15 at 13:39
  • Hopefully the Google link will change over time and new information will be reflected there. – jmabs Jan 18 '15 at 16:20
  • 1
    @jferr: If it changes, your answer should be updated too. – Oddthinking Jan 18 '15 at 16:36
  • @JohnDemetriou: I don't think picking an arbitrary dose helps us investigate the claim. – Oddthinking Jan 18 '15 at 16:37
  • 1
    @Oddthinking, yes, someone should probably go through every StackExchange question that has ever been asked and update them as new research is published, but that is never going to happen. – jmabs Jan 18 '15 at 16:45
  • @jferr, still, please don't use google links. They are frowned upon anywhere in the network. – Sklivvz Jan 18 '15 at 18:06
  • This researchgate link actually points to an article unrelated to this question. – tpianca Jan 22 '15 at 10:38
  • I edited the link, it was correct but was acting strangely. – jmabs Jan 22 '15 at 16:53
  • ***How*** the drugs affect someone plays into this beyond just "impairment," as well. A drug that impairs my skills, perception, reflexes while also lowering my inhibitions is going to be more dangerous, at identical level of impairment, vs one that impairs me, but makes me a bit on the paranoid side, as well. – PoloHoleSet Nov 06 '17 at 20:15