 |
Re: Societal Issue? Or Maybe just more post accident testing?
Author: BOB2
Date: 09-16-2016 - 08:54
The Washington Post article pointed out (as opposed to the other very poorly articles edited from the original) that the "sky rocket" was going from zero, to two, to fourteen "post accident" tests that were positive, over a three year period. The actual rate among all 50,000 plus tests conducted of RR operating personnel subject to testing showed virtually no change or increase over the same period, however.
From my old colleagues still working, I understand that they now test for almost anything that happens, or falls off the tracks, and testing regimes are much better (no more phony bags of urine, or phony "dicks" allowed, and better testing to detect masking substances...like the Olympics, as well as more "prescription" substances being tested for).
Utah tried to claim an increase in stoned drivers after Colorado legalized, and it turned out that they had increased the number of post accident fatality tox screens. This did increased the "total" number of positives for weed, over the previous year. This was done by doing more tests for the presence of weed, even when the deceased was not at fault in the accident, (more test given equals more positives...go figure). Which they ginned up into a hot press release about some "huge" "percentage: "increase" over the previous year. This was not seen in the rate per driver tested, when pulled over for impaired driving, and failing a field sobriety test, however.
These will not be the only selective edits on this subject you will read this political season, with legalization on the ballot in so many places, and the newest "moral" "war, being increasingly "waged", by moralistic zealots, mostly on "old people" in our "aging" population, whom they believe are using "too many" opioids for chronic pain.
Bad science is naturally a solid "coin of the realm", where folks can "use" supposed "math" and "statistics" in order to create a misleading and/or false narrative, in a math impaired society, for political "propaganda" purposes, in order to manipulate public fears over these issues.
From my old colleagues still working, I understand that they now test for almost anything that happens, or falls off the tracks, and testing regimes are much better (no more phony bags of urine, or phony "dicks" allowed, and better testing to detect masking substances...like the Olympics, as well as more "prescription" substances being tested for).
Utah tried to claim an increase in stoned drivers after Colorado legalized, and it turned out that they had increased the number of post accident fatality tox screens. This did increased the "total" number of positives for weed, over the previous year. This was done by doing more tests for the presence of weed, even when the deceased was not at fault in the accident, (more test given equals more positives...go figure). Which they ginned up into a hot press release about some "huge" "percentage: "increase" over the previous year. This was not seen in the rate per driver tested, when pulled over for impaired driving, and failing a field sobriety test, however.
These will not be the only selective edits on this subject you will read this political season, with legalization on the ballot in so many places, and the newest "moral" "war, being increasingly "waged", by moralistic zealots, mostly on "old people" in our "aging" population, whom they believe are using "too many" opioids for chronic pain.
Bad science is naturally a solid "coin of the realm", where folks can "use" supposed "math" and "statistics" in order to create a misleading and/or false narrative, in a math impaired society, for political "propaganda" purposes, in order to manipulate public fears over these issues.
