Talk:Cannabis and impaired driving

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 7 January 2019 and 23 March 2019. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Rmhtw. Peer reviewers: Catherineporto.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 18:36, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Intro dubious; strongly worded statements that contradict the fuller discussion

The intro needs to be revised. It makes strong assertions that are then contradicted in the fuller page ("known to cause impaired driving in users, with effects on a driver similar to those of alcohol" where the following article reports, multiple times, that cannabis has no statistically significant impact on driving, and even that antihistamines and penicillin have a stronger impact on the odds of a vehicle crash than cannabis.) The sources cited in support of the intro's assertions, the BCMJ and a pop-science book, are dubious. BCMJ has an impact factor of less than 0.2, essentially no one finds it credible, and while impact factor is not a perfect measurement, such a low value is concerning when lacking more credible support for such a strong statement. The other source is a pop-sci book, and has received no positive attention within a relevant scientific source. Both sources are also by Canadian authors, which is curious.

The intro should be revised to highlight prevailing uncertainty regarding the relationship between cannabis and impaired driving. The assertions currently standing in the intro should be moved into the broader discussion, and the broader discussion might benefit from being split by results of the studies. I suspect splitting the discussion in this way would also homogenise the discussion by scientific credibility. Winjammer (talk) 16:43, 19 September 2018 (UTC)

I wrote the intro best as possible, with the realization that there were differences in the studies and their conclusions. Since this involves epidemiology studies, I think we need some experts on MEDRS to sort out the proper presentation of the results. ☆ Bri (talk) 18:46, 19 September 2018 (UTC)

One other thing, about the book you mentioned which I assume you mean Cannabis: A Complete Guide by Small and issued by the scientific publisher CRC Press: the WikiProject has used that quite a bit and it has been treated as a well researched RS. If not worthy of such, there should probably be a project discussion. ☆ Bri (talk) 18:56, 19 September 2018 (UTC)

I agree that the intro is very confusing and contradicts the following paragraphs. I agree that the intro should be revised to show the uncertainty regarding whether or not cannabis impairs driving.Rmhtw (talk) 18:26, 3 February 2019 (UTC)

Just to add on, the first link is now dead, while the second is not a link at all. I don't doubt that these journals and studies exist, but I think we should at least have them easily accessible from the article. If that can't be arranged, the citations should not be considered valid and the "fact" should be removed. Elijah (talk) 13:24, 9 July 2019 (UTC)

External links

@Bri: with regards to your revert: per WP:ELNO, in the external links section there should be only an official link, or no link at all. I support removal of the whole external links section if that is better than removal of all but the CDC link (a federal agency). --Treetear (talk) 01:28, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

How can there be an official link for something like this? Makes no sense. This is not about an organization with any singular website. The guideline that pertains is WP:ELYES: Sites that contain neutral and accurate material that is relevant to an encyclopedic understanding of the subject". ☆ Bri (talk) 03:45, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

Indeed makes no sense, that's why there should be no external link. Per WP:ELYES: the Norml link fails because it is not neutral (only quotes positive sources). The Australia link could possibly be used. The CDC could possibly be used. The boulder weekly article shouldn't be there at all. --Treetear (talk) 12:53, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

Fork?

There's an article for Drunk driving in the United States.

There's a lot of content here about the United States.

Should we fork out Cannabis and impaired driving in the United States?

@Bri: Any thoughts? ---Another Believer _(Talk) 00:24, 18 April 2020 (UTC)

No problem pulling out the state-by-state recitation of laws, standards, and testing. ☆ Bri (talk) 00:32, 18 April 2020 (UTC)