4 ms·
This article is a great example of how correlation might be suggestive of causation, but is not itself causation. Are pickup trucks inherently more dangerous t
by nerdponx 4y ago
This article is a great example of how correlation might be suggestive of causation, but is not itself causation.
Are pickup trucks inherently more dangerous than other vehicles? Or are pickup truck drivers more dangerous than other drivers? Or are pickup trucks more likely to be driving on more-dangerous roads than on less-dangerous roads?
Unfortunately I wasn't able to read the article due to the paywall, but I didn't see any mention of controlling for confounders in the abstract.
- Nick87633 4y agoI've never seen a Camry roll coal on a bicyclist but I've seen it half a dozen times by pickup truck drivers
- alwayslikethis 4y agoRolling coal generally requires diesel engines (the smoke is from partially burned diesel). Gasoline is much easier to burn and I imagine it would be rather hard to modify a gasoline car to produce black smoke.
- DangitBobby 4y agoI've had plenty of people in sedans pass me in my lane with less than 1 foot of space.
- Nick87633 4y agoBobby That is a consideration I hadn't thought of... I always take the full lane unless there is a dedicated bike lane.
- zeendo 4y agoI advocate taking the lane in many situations but it's worth noting that you can be passed in your lane with less than 1 ft of space even if you're taking the lane.
- mrwh 4y agoAre there reasons to think that trucks are easier to drive safely? E.g. you might be able to see further (even if you can't see the child walking in front of you at the crosswalk). Seem to be plenty of reasons to think they are more dangerous, and that it would be surprising to find that they aren't.
- nerdponx 4y agoOf course, but the point is that you can't disentangle that from other possible causes just by looking at the association between it and an outcome.