Groups > misc.phone.mobile.iphone > #202719

Re: Why do people claim cellphone use increased the USA accident rate?

From	Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com>
Newsgroups	misc.phone.mobile.iphone, comp.mobile.android, rec.autos.driving, alt.home.repair, rec.autos.tech
Subject	Re: Why do people claim cellphone use increased the USA accident rate?
Date	2026-09-21 10:30 +1200
Organization	A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID	<118pmqf$3h2bf$1@dont-email.me> (permalink)
References	(1 earlier) <118kcp4$1n4u6$1@dont-email.me> <nh6f69FlreiU1@mid.individual.net> <118m4p2$29rj8$1@dont-email.me> <118md02$2dni8$1@dont-email.me> <118p0k0$38mo6$1@dont-email.me>

Cross-posted to 5 groups.

Show all headers | View raw

On 2026-09-20 16:11:42 +0000, AMuzi said:
> On 9/19/2026 5:18 PM, Chris wrote:
>> AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
>>> On 9/19/2026 9:12 AM, Chris wrote:
>>>> AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
>>>>> On 9/18/2026 11:02 PM, Maria Sophia wrote:
>>>>>> Brian Gregory wrote:
>>>>>>>> Assuming no other factor was involved to cancel the arguments that 
>>>>>>>> people are claiming, if their hypothesis is cell phones cause 
>>>>>>>> accidents, then the accident rate should have skyrocketed at some point 
>>>>>>>> during the introduction of cellphones, right?
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> But you can't just assume no other factor.
>>>>>>> Why would you think you could??
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> How can you possibly say that as mobile phones gradually became more
>>>>>>> popular other factors weren't, at the same time, reducing the accident rate?
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> I agree.
>>>>>> Your God works in mysterious ways that even you, can't explain.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> But you still believe very deeply in your staid religious views, don't 
>>>>>> you. But, where's your data?
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Let's look at it.
>>>>>> What are you claiming happens to all your missing accidents?
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Maybe aliens took them?
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> HINT: The spike in accident rates you claim, simply never existed.
>>>>>> You made it up.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Frequent logical gap to an unsupported conclusion.
>>>>> 
>>>>> USA has world-high rates of autism in children. USA also had
>>>>> very high rates of childhood vaccination. Some people infer
>>>>> a link but such may or may not actually be causal.  This is
>>>>> as yet unknown; maybe, but maybe not.
>>>> 
>>>> It absolutely is known. It has been tested and retested many times. There
>>>> is no evidence that any vaccine causes autism in children.
>>> 
>>> I happen to agree with you on that, but just as the telephones-in-autos 
>>> example, absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.
>> 
>> Except with vaccines there isn't any absence of evidence.
> 
> As with police radio and truckers on CB for decades, audio seems to be 
> benign as compared to a video or text device. Yet legislatures make no 
> distinction and aggregated data (as referenced by OP) lumps all those 
> together.  Some large proportion of people believe both that there is a 
> childhood vaccine and autism link ( I am not one) and that telephones 
> are a crash risk while ignoring console and telephone video and text as 
> unique interfaces disparate from audio.
> 
> Existing evidence has failed to sway a great many people in both areas.

A quick Google search seems to indicate that using a CB radio or 
similar while driving is also illegal in some US states (exemptions of 
emergency services, etc.), but not in others.

Thread

csiph-web