NTSB Recommends .05 BAC Limit

It does not show that the accidents were caused by the drivers having a certain level of alcohol, just that a certain level was present.

A Food Forum: The best place on the internet to do interpretation of statistical data. But that's what make this a great place.

9 grad credits in stats and research methodology here. You?

Just 6 hours at the under grad level, so obviously no claim to expertise in this area. It's funny that this conversation reminded me of an AGW discussion with one of our mutual "friends".

I just figured the older people had more practice driving drunk.

That may not be all that far off base. There are studies that indicate that old timers just smarten up and drive drunk less often, thus having fewer accidents. They practice avoidance. I have not seen any studies that indicate the level of impairment at various BACs is influenced by age, although they may exist.

[Robin Garr]

It's funny that this conversation reminded me of an AGW discussion with one of our mutual "friends".

Now, class, let's pick up our notebooks for today's lecture, "The precise meaning of 'orders of magnitude.'"

How many accidents in recent years, nationwide, have involved drivers with BAC between .05 and .08.

The NY Times has this graphic that helps answer your question:

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2013/05/27/science/drunk-driving-2011.html

Based on that graph, I'd say they may be able justify a level of .06% or .07%, but .05% seems like a reach.

How many accidents in recent years, nationwide, have involved drivers with BAC between .05 and .08.

The NY Times has this graphic that helps answer your question:

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2013/05/27/science/drunk-driving-2011.html

Based on that graph, I'd say they may be able justify a level of .06% or .07%, but .05% seems like a reach.

You are certainly doing a lot better than most of us if you can make any sense of that graph! It looks like one of the ones you can use to justify or shoot down anything anyone proposes.

You are certainly doing a lot better than most of us if you can make any sense of that graph! It looks like one of the ones you can use to justify or shoot down anything anyone proposes.

Exactly.

There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies and statistics.

You are certainly doing a lot better than most of us if you can make any sense of that graph! It looks like one of the ones you can use to justify or shoot down anything anyone proposes.

Exactly.

There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies and statistics.

What can I say? I'm a self-proclaimed mathlete.

Hmm, really, I should have said, "using only that chart as a frame of reference." By no means was I intending to vouch for the integrity of the data and/or methodology.