Seems like another case of using statistics to prove anything. It's not the study I don't believe but the interpretation. Before I go on, I'll give full disclosure: I'm on the board of a drug use prevention/treatment charity that works closely with government agencies and private companies that research all types of drug use and related subjects like that of this article. I'm also a former poly drug abuser (that means I was a gigantic stoner some years back too).

I think the implications made here are dangerous. They encourage current pot smokers to keep driving stoned and sends the message that driving stoned is safer than driving sober. That's just not so.

The reason for the statistic showing marijuana users being responsible for accidents less than sober drivers may simply be a product of the fact that there are just less stoned people driving than sober people.

There's no doubt that marijuana impairs your ability to operate a vehicle. It slows reaction times and messes with one's perception of speed and distance. It also has an effect on focus. Some people become distracted while others focus too strongly on one particular thing. That effect seems dependent partly upon dosage used and the individual.

Trying to be cautious and actually doing it successfully are very different. Slow driving does not amount to safe driving. Driving slowly can lead to accidents just the same as speeding. Driving requires you to be mindful of many things at once. Going back to what I said about focus, being high while driving can make the task overwhelming for those who experience a lack of focus while under the influence or it can a driver to be far top focused on one particular aspect of diving. For example, a diver can be so focused on his speed that he doesn't notice the guy tailing him too closely in the rear view. Driver has to stop short because he misjudged the distance and speed of the cars in front of him and wasn't focused enough on them causing the guy tailing him to crash. That's an avoidable situation and one where the stoned driver would not be at fault. Regardless of whether the driver who was tailing too closely shouldn't have done that the point is that this is an example of an avoidable situation that is actually very realistic.

I'll concede that marijuana is far less dangerous than alcohol. In fact, despite my position on the board of the charity I mentioned and despite my less-than-good experience with drug use and subsequent rehab, I still take the position that pot is generally harmless. So what I'm saying isn't coming from some hard line "just say no/all drugs are evil" perspective but we can't just deny that marijuana use doesn't impair you in the ways I describe. I don't even believe its bad for you (except for inhaling the smoke - even if it a billion times less dangerous than cigarettes it's still never a good idea to inhale any kind of smoke). Unfortunately, articles like this will give some people the impression that marijuana is good for you, absolutely, and only good things can come of its use. That's irresponsible and one single study showing this will not convince me that driving while stoned is safer than driving sober.

As far as I'm concerned this is just a really catchy article that should not be taken at face value. The study could have major flaws and for all we know it may just be a way to get publicity for the insurance company that sponsored it. The spin on this is really irresponsible. Even total stoners like the kind my friends and I once were should take it with a grain of salt but I doubt they will because it's just more reinforcement for their beliefs surrounding marijuana use. You know what I mean... There are always those groups of suburban, upper middle class white kids that are nerdy then discover weed, smoke some, turn into stoners, and then they all talk about how marijuana is the cure for everything from cancer to aids to the common cold and a way to avoid death itself. It's those kids I fear for when they read this.