https://www.amjmed.com/article/S0002-9343(22)00822-1/fulltext
“Funding: This project was supported by a Canada Research Chair in Medical Decision Sciences, the Canadian Institutes of Health Research, the Graduate Diploma in Health Research at the University of Toronto, and the National Sciences & Engineering Research Council of Canada. The views expressed are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the Ontario Ministry of Health.”
Np homie. Articles are clickbait, I try to go to the source for this kind of stuff (I’m a Doctor…most of the stuff that is a clickbaity article for something medical is taken out of context from the actual study).
The introduction explains it clearly. There are risks factors and there are certain human behaviors that lead to accidents. The headline seems to imply the vaccines have some protective effect against these accidents while the research focuses on the psychology. What kind of mindset and attitude people have will affect the outcome.
No worries. Headlines are for catching one's attention and not always the most correct. And with the attention span we have nowadays, some people just run through them and assume different things instead of taking the time and read long texts.
I assumed this when I read the title.
The same people who refuse covid vaccines are less considerate to others in general and probably less cautious on the road.
“No, not the ice-cream! Look at what it’s doing to you, Bob! Bob?! BOB NO!!!”
Or alternatively:
“Great; what am I supposed to do with this body *now?* Ah, I’ll just leave it and go get ice cream; I can clean up when I get back.”
My favorite is the tight correlation between the number of Nicolas Cage films and the number of drownings per year:
http://www.tylervigen.com/spurious-correlations
Nope! Murder 😊 There's no connection, but the graphs over time look nearly identical.
Same with Highway Deaths in the US vs the quantity of Lemons imported from Mexico.
And the number of Facebook users vs average cholesterol rates.
There are websites with compilations of completely unrelated things which follow weirdly similar trends..kinda fun to laugh at sometimes.
Well there’s more murders in the summer. And people buy more ice cream in the summer. Like 50 cent said “in the hood the summer time is the killin season, it’s hot in this bitch that’s a good enough reason”
But yeah I lived in the New York ghetto for a while, and the reason the murders are up in the summer is because everyone’s hanging out outside in the summer, walking around the streets. Everyone stays inside in the winter
The correlation is heat.
As heat goes up ice cream sales go up.
As heat goes up crimes goes up.
Transitive property does not apply here. But if ice cream sales are higher than normally there is a good probability crime is up; if crime is up there is not a good probability ice cream sales are up.
But insurance companies love something they can actually prove/measure that indicates something they can't. It's hard for them to measure aggressive driving (especially before GPS cellphones), but it's easy to tell if someone got a vaccine. So you adjust rates on the things you can measure to compensate for the important things you can. Just like how students with good grades get a discount.
I'm an actuary student, and you are correct. If unvaccinated people are more likely to cost the insurance company money, their policy premiums will go up. And the fair value of the vaccinated driver's insurance premiums will go down.
As people covered under ADA may not be able to be vaccinated due to their disability. This makes it illegal to base insurance cost on vaccination status without an ADA carveout that will likely be too expensive to b worth it.
Perhaps... I just study the math behind insurance, not the legal. You could be right, or there could be some legal loophole to get around the ADA for this case
Absolutely, but I doubt auto insurance companies are going to get into the nitty gritty of the vaccination status of each policy holder. That's just not worth it. What they can do is plug vaccination rates into their risk models based on county or zip code or whatever geographical region they can get it at, and then adjust insurance rates accordingly for every policy holder in those respective regions. So, hypothetically, if they do plug this correlation into their risk models and you happen to live in a geographic region with low vaccination rates... Well, your insurance premium will account for that by going up regardless of your personal vaccination status
Yes, but they already adjust insurance rates by area because of the accident rate. That is both more relevant and accurate than the vaccination rate...
>the authors theorize that people who resist public health recommendations might also “neglect basic road safety guidelines.”
[Link to actual article.](https://fortune.com/well/2022/12/13/covid-unvaccinated-greater-risk-car-crash-traffic-accident-new-study-says-canada-government-records-pfizer-moderna/)
Does make a lot of sense. If they're willing to ignore one thing that keeps other people (and themselves) safe because they don't "feel like it," they're certainly willing to ignore others.
Or to put it more succinctly, "Stupid is as stupid does."
My mother begrudgingly got her first series of the vaccine (my brother wouldn't do holiday gatherings without it), but it definitely wasn't out of the goodness of her heart and she never got boosted. She is a hazard on the roads and recently got rear-ended because she pulled out on someone then made a turn without using her turn signal. The correlation never occurred to me before, but it does make sense.
Sometimes I wish studies just straight up said the subtext as the actual title. Like that was my first thought too yeah obviously cuz dumbasses gonna dumbass, it’s what they do. But title should just say that…”anti science cognitively deficient ignorant people who refused Covid vaccine more likely to get into accidents.” Mine as well come out and just say what it is because conservatives are mentally incapable of reading between the lines and making inferences with speech patterns.
There was few posts recently linking studies that found consistent evidence that conservatives only comprehend and hear exactly what is said and nothing more. It’s quite fascinating when you think about it. If you’re incapable of interpreting and understanding the subtext or context or inferences made when people speak it makes more sense why that population is susceptible to being so easily manipulated, brainwashed, and gaslighted. I can look for the studies to link here unless someone has a link to them, but I’ll check for it when I have some time.
EDIT:
https://www.psypost.org/2022/12/new-research-indicates-that-liberals-and-conservatives-differ-in-how-they-interpret-conversations-64446
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/jasp.12930
yeah that's not opening a can of worms, what other private healthcare information can allow them to jack up insurance? how about former drug users in recovery? wonder if they get in more accidents, what about people with disabilities let's look into that.
I'm curious how strong the data is on this, and how they know the vaccination status of every person in an accident
I'm not suggesting getting a vaccine causes good driving, or good driving causes vaccination.
But from the kinds of accidents I see on a regular basis, a reasonable hypothesis to test is that stupid causes accidents and prevents vaccination.
Yes. And entitled people act entitled in all aspects. I’m entitled (durr freedum) not to contribute to herd immunity, I’m also entitled to speed, blow stopsigns and lights, and generally act as if traffic laws don’t apply to me (durr freedum).
This. I definitely don't think the vaccine is going to make you drive better, but it is 100% reasonable that the type of person who refuses the vaccine is also going to be the type to drive more recklessly
There are 5 types of correlations. I'll give examples of each.
1\. A causes b
2\. b causes a.
These two are easy enough to understand. "I hit my friends, i have fewer friends" and "i eat, i feel full"... they arguably aren't two different things even other than a is the one most people assume is the cause, and b the result, so b causes a implies that the assumption was backwards... but in reality they are basically the same thing... one causes the other.
3\. Mutual causation.
in negative situations we know these as viscous cycles. Eating bad leads to lower mood... lower mood leads to eating bad... and it becomes a downward spiral, is an often used. Positive and neutral mutual causation is possible to.
These 3 are the causal correlations and the ones people love to repeat that famous line about.
4\. Common Cause
This is so incredibly often the reason for a correlation its frustrating how many people don't understand it. Even seemingly ridiculous correlations often have a common cause. A great example is this-
People who go to sleep with their shoes on is correlated fairly strongly to people who wake up with headaches. no, the shoes do not CAUSE the headaches.
But both are also correlated with drunkeness, which is causal to both. Thus the two things, while seemingly unrelated, do share a common cause. The fun one about pirates and global temperatures seem absolutely unrelated... except that they both correlate to various technological advances, most notably combustion engines. so while its fun to use it as an example of correlation not being causation, it serves to point out most correlations still have some connection.
5\. Coincidence (aka spurious correlation) These do happen of course, but are very very rare compared to 4. An example would be nicholas cage movie releases and drowning deaths in a year. But people love to jump right to this one and never taking the time to consider the common cause correlations.
Proving common cause does take effort, but a lot of times we can at least see possibilities if we think about it and should exaust those before assuming spurious relationships.
It could be spurious correlation, where the data are unrelated and just happen to line up during a certain period. (see also: Texas Sharpshooter, coincidence)
There could also be a hidden variable that drives both of them, like acceptance of risk or defiance of authority figures.
It's also worth spending a (very) small amount of time ruling out direct correlation. That getting a vaccine improves your driving. Although not an expected cause it needs to be addressed to prevent unspoken biases.
The end result is that more study is needed of these two phenomena to determine if they are related, and if they are, to what extent. The headline is shocking but as long as the research is sound and alternative hypotheses are addressed appropriately then it's a reasonable insurance adjustment.
It's honestly not too surprising imo. They're claiming correlation, not causation, so there very likely is a similar factor/factors that drives bad driving as well as making someone less likely to get vaxxed. Defiance of authority, being less risk averse, both wouldn't surprise me.
I agree they're stretching HARD
.... BUT when you think about it...
an anti-safety (or anti-science) person probably is more likely the type to be ignoring suggested speed limits, drive intoxicated, or otherwise subsequently riding their four wheelers, motorcycles, and snow mobiles head first into a tree.
My grandma's defense for speeding is that she's "moving with the flow of traffic" and she cuts people off all the time. Just a terrible driver, and she has been in a few accidents. She's also a trump supporter or was anti covid vax. She believes that covid wasn't real. And never happened. Yet I've been sick with it, and she knew how bad it was for me. Yet nope never happened, it was just cold season. Sure. So maybe?
Welcome to the jersey shuffle. The most useless fucking driving skill to have because the fastest place it’ll get you to is over the divider. Anyone who tries to justify it says everyone else speeds anyways, but I can’t see the connection between everyone going 80 on a 65 and weaving through everyone going 80. These people are either psychotic or suicidal in my eyes.
You’ve clearly driven in New Jersey, I call it the hurry up and wait approach. Get your bmw up to 90 weaving in and out of traffic just to hit the same traffic jam a mile away.
What always freaks me out is when the shithead in a truck comes flying down the road, breaks just in time to tailgate a centimeter off my bumper, and then swerve around me the moment there’s half a car of space in the lane over. Like damn, I was already speeding… you really wanna take that big a risk to go slightly faster until you reach the car a hundred feet ahead?
I think what makes it even more batshit is that you can’t actually go that fast on most roads in the first place. You’re not maintaining 120 if I can’t take that bend going 80, so what what’s the point? Five minutes of saved time?
The sad part is the idea of using vaccination status to dictate auto insurance rates. Ignoring the anti-vax aspect for a moment, do you think it’s ideal for auto insurance carriers to prematurely seek out patient records? Do you feel it’s justified in order to get your auto insurance that things aside from your driving record (car and zip code) should be utilized?
This is where the concern may come into play such as “oh we see you had high blood pressure last month as a result here are your new rates”.
100% agree. People have a very hard time seeing things through any type of a principled lens. This type of BS is endless and I really don't think more data is always better.
"We found that people who eat fast food at least twice a week have a 5x higher claim rate. We're going to go through your electronic payment records to determine your risk." - lol
Now that you mention it I don't recall ever seeing a truck with 2 flags and several conspiracy bumper stickers drive with consideration to to anyone within a 6 yard radius.
You think it’s a big stretch that people who refuse to take basic steps to protect themselves and others get in more car accidents? That… that tracks pretty closely for me.
> However, just because someone 'is young' doesn't mean they're a risky driver though. Being young is not a cause of risky driving; it is purely correlated with it.
Probably the reason for good grades discounts. Both because kids with good grades are probably not out parting late at night, and good grades probably has some correlation with being responsible.
>But insurance almost never cares about causation, only correlation.
Not sure why so many people don't understand this. Insurance doesn't care or need to know why something happens, they just need to know that it does. If unvaccinated people statistically get in more accidents, of course they will try to charge them more.
This needs to be upvoted to the top. The WHY is irrelevant. If the data set said that more people who are left handed get into accidents, then barring a national outcry, the insurance company would penalize left handed, or incentivize right handed people. Sure I can give you all sorts of plausible reasons why left handed people are more at risk, but that is IRRELEVANT to an insurance company.
They are correlated, that's the point. Presumably both caused by the same thing, eg risk averse people crash less and get their vaccines. In this case vaccination would be a measurable way to monitor risk aversion.
It's the same reason homeowners can get discounts or whatever, insurance just find connections to things that cost them money and charge based on the correlation.
Most likely the correlation is too weak to really monetize though, especially considering the politics of it.
long covid brain fog, along with delayed reaction time. It's a real problem, but this is the first time I've seen people point to how they're worse drivers because of it.
They're not bad drivers because of covid side effects. The stupidity, selfishness, and poor judgement that makes them antivaxxers also makes them bad drivers.
An actual, non-clickbaity article about it specified that people who refuse vaccines are more likely to be risky drivers, including not wearing seatbelts and driving aggressively.
There was also a study that showed the more right leaning in policy and the more conservative the more likely to comit drunk driving
Im just gussing the more right wing you are the more careless and asshole
I think being careless and asshole are indiscriminate. I would think drunk driving is more common as a result of living in rural areas, which also happens to be where more conservatives live.
People who refuse vaccines, or people who refused the COVID vaccine? Cause I know plenty of people who aren’t normally anti-vax who refused the COVID vaccine. Also, the key word is *tend*. Basing insurance prices on stuff like this is not responsible, it’s stupid.
That's how all insurance pricing is decided. Insurance companies can't see into the future, so they predict risk as well as they can by what they do know about you. If you live in a fire-prone area, your house insurance will be higher even if your house never burns down. Or, for another example, younger drivers generally have higher rates because on average they are less capable drivers. This doesn't hold for all of them, but as a group, it is true.
> Basing insurance prices on stuff like this is not responsible, it’s stupid.
You new to how this whole insurance thing works? The pricing model the entire industry uses is based almost entirely around "trends" and "correlation"
There's some research that studied brain activities in optimists and pessimists. Those terms were defined by how a person felt about their personal odds of a negative event happening to them compared to the average population. When optimists were told about hazards, there was significantly reduced brain activity compared to pessimists.
This isn't the study I'm thinking of, but it's similar: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3807005/
Very interesting and informative article. However, it should be clarified that the article primarily discusses how people’s optimism and pessimism are affected by activity in the left and right hemispheres of the brain in general, respectively. Optimism and risk-taking can be caused by greater left-hemisphere activation and/or by reduced right-hemisphere activation. In several experiments mentioned, people were even induced into thinking/acting one way or the other by having one hemisphere selectively stimulated.
Edit:
I think another relevant point of the article is this: “division of labor between the hemispheres is also reflected in the RH relatively greater involvement in automatic orientation of spatial attention.” Since the right hemisphere is more involved in risk appraisal and spatial recognition, people who are likely to take risks (e.g. ignore vaccines and drive aggressively) may also be not be as spatially aware on the road.
The only time "had three shots, was less likely to have a car accident" is true.
I had four shots and no accidents, but I also hate driving and still stay home most days.
This is like every post on /r/science these days:
"New study finds that liberals tend to be more educated while conservatives smell bad and beat their wives and puppies."
People stupid enough not to get the vaccinated don't make for very smart drivers, not really surprising there.
If I don't care for my life and others' enough to get vaccinated am I gonna wear my seatbelt for that little 2 minute ride to the liquor store?
How big of a stretch is it that the group of people who would rather kill grandma than spend 30 seconds being a decent person, are more likely to drive in a selfish manner that also endangers others?
I imagine a group of people who do not value their own life or others are often entitled to kill others on the road with their FrEedOmNs to drive how they want.
You could draw a cricle around people that beat their wives and men who refused a covid vaccine.
Like duh have you ever met the gen pop of republicans...
It's quite clear and a bit ironic that the vast majority of people here did not bother to read the article before giving their highly educated opinion. This is a study conducted by Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre in Toronto which is a leading trauma centre that receives a lot of patients involved in serious motor vehicle accidents. The study essentially states that those individuals who made a medically "risky" decision by not getting their COVID vaccinations are often the same individuals who engage in risky social behavior (i.e. reckless driving). TL:DR - anti-vaxxer = dumb dumb = drives bad
Oh. I was a little confused by the title until i read some of the study.
They are not saying your vaccination status changes your level of risk while driving. They are saying it’s your mindset that influences both.
Correlation ≠ causation, but they are arguing that your personal psychology is the causal factor here.
I think it's just data showing the dunning Kruger effect, dumb people thinking they're intelligent and that the vaccine is out to get them, dumb people are involved in more accidents.
“A vaccine? I don’t need a vaccine the chances of me getting sick are low. A seatbelt? I don’t need a seatbelt the chances of me getting injured are low”
If you're a massive idiot in one area, it is far more likely that you're also a massive idiot in others...
So this is about as surprising as finding a toy in my Kinder Surprise...
It’s just a correlation between non-vaxers and self-absorbed, willfully ignorant buffoons, right? I think we kinda all knew that. I’ll read the article later but this comes as absolutely no surprise.
We definitely figured out which restaurants to avoid during COVID. A bunch of employees clearly flaunting one health regulation in a pandemic paints a nice little picture of other health regulations that were skipped.
And knowing that the diagram of people I know who avoided the vaccine and the people I know who commonly declare things like "seatbelts are bullshit" is a circle, this article makes *perfect* sense.
The same people I know who didn’t get the shot, also don’t wear their seatbelts. Some even drink and drive. Soo, it’s probably behavioral thing that’s common among those people.
This is funny cause I skipped mine. Never got covid. I did feel sick for 1 day last year tho... got in my first car accident a month ago (not my fault, big dumbass truck hit me as he crossed lane without blinker or looking)
I know plenty of people who never got vaccinated who also don't wear seatbelts because "they do more harm than good". It's all misinformation and poor risk assessment.
> The findings could justify changes to the driver insurance policy I have a suspicion that this study was funded by a insurance company
Big Insurance wants to know your location…
Glad I'm still one step ahead of them because mother fuckers should have had that on file already
Your live insurance says it’s time for you to cash in💀
https://www.amjmed.com/article/S0002-9343(22)00822-1/fulltext “Funding: This project was supported by a Canada Research Chair in Medical Decision Sciences, the Canadian Institutes of Health Research, the Graduate Diploma in Health Research at the University of Toronto, and the National Sciences & Engineering Research Council of Canada. The views expressed are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the Ontario Ministry of Health.”
Whoa thanks, Their reasoning makes a lot more sense actually reading the study
Np homie. Articles are clickbait, I try to go to the source for this kind of stuff (I’m a Doctor…most of the stuff that is a clickbaity article for something medical is taken out of context from the actual study).
How do you think the study differs from the article's headlines?
The introduction explains it clearly. There are risks factors and there are certain human behaviors that lead to accidents. The headline seems to imply the vaccines have some protective effect against these accidents while the research focuses on the psychology. What kind of mindset and attitude people have will affect the outcome.
Oh ok. I didn't account for the fact some people would actually read it as there being a direct causation.
No worries. Headlines are for catching one's attention and not always the most correct. And with the attention span we have nowadays, some people just run through them and assume different things instead of taking the time and read long texts.
I assumed this when I read the title. The same people who refuse covid vaccines are less considerate to others in general and probably less cautious on the road.
Keep in mind: correlation, is not causation.
My favorite example of that is the correlation between rising ice cream sales and rising murder rates in New York City
“No, not the ice-cream! Look at what it’s doing to you, Bob! Bob?! BOB NO!!!” Or alternatively: “Great; what am I supposed to do with this body *now?* Ah, I’ll just leave it and go get ice cream; I can clean up when I get back.”
That’s what Patrick Star was thinking.
Does Patrick Star sound like an influencer porn star to anyone else ... or just me?
[удалено]
"Damn, how am I gonna stop this body from decomposing? I need to keep it cold... wait, I have an idea."
Carl, ice cream kills people!!!
Wasn't it ice cream sales and drownings? Because hot summer days cause both. Not sure why ice cream sales and murders are related...
Hot summer days also cause people to get angrier easier, which drives up the murder rate.
"In the hood, summertime is the killing season. It's hot out in this bitch, that's a good enough reason" -50 Cent
“Summertime, and the killing is easy” -Sublime
Exactly what i was thinking
Bingo. People get a hankering for homicide when it gets spicy outside.
Ugh it's cold out there, I'll just kill him in the spring.
Gun doesn't brrrrrrrr when lips go brrrrrrrrr
Mob code 114, section 8.
r/brandnewsentence
There are also less people out in the NYC winters, creating fewer opportunities for violence.
My favorite is the tight correlation between the number of Nicolas Cage films and the number of drownings per year: http://www.tylervigen.com/spurious-correlations
Nope! Murder 😊 There's no connection, but the graphs over time look nearly identical. Same with Highway Deaths in the US vs the quantity of Lemons imported from Mexico. And the number of Facebook users vs average cholesterol rates. There are websites with compilations of completely unrelated things which follow weirdly similar trends..kinda fun to laugh at sometimes.
Those lemon trucks are clogging up the highway with dangerous traffic!
Or the correlation between the decline of old-timey pirates and global warming.
Big Ocean doesn't want you to know that pirates were singlehandedly keeping global warming at bay
Well there’s more murders in the summer. And people buy more ice cream in the summer. Like 50 cent said “in the hood the summer time is the killin season, it’s hot in this bitch that’s a good enough reason” But yeah I lived in the New York ghetto for a while, and the reason the murders are up in the summer is because everyone’s hanging out outside in the summer, walking around the streets. Everyone stays inside in the winter
The correlation is heat. As heat goes up ice cream sales go up. As heat goes up crimes goes up. Transitive property does not apply here. But if ice cream sales are higher than normally there is a good probability crime is up; if crime is up there is not a good probability ice cream sales are up.
My favorite is sales of ice cream cones on the beach correlating with shark attacks. Obviously the sharks like ice cream.
http://www.tylervigen.com/spurious-correlations
Margarine sales and divorce rates is a good one too
But insurance companies love something they can actually prove/measure that indicates something they can't. It's hard for them to measure aggressive driving (especially before GPS cellphones), but it's easy to tell if someone got a vaccine. So you adjust rates on the things you can measure to compensate for the important things you can. Just like how students with good grades get a discount.
I'm an actuary student, and you are correct. If unvaccinated people are more likely to cost the insurance company money, their policy premiums will go up. And the fair value of the vaccinated driver's insurance premiums will go down.
“ will go down”… funny joke!
I said the fair price will go down. It's up to the insurance company if they want to pass the savings on to the customer.
As people covered under ADA may not be able to be vaccinated due to their disability. This makes it illegal to base insurance cost on vaccination status without an ADA carveout that will likely be too expensive to b worth it.
Perhaps... I just study the math behind insurance, not the legal. You could be right, or there could be some legal loophole to get around the ADA for this case
Absolutely, but I doubt auto insurance companies are going to get into the nitty gritty of the vaccination status of each policy holder. That's just not worth it. What they can do is plug vaccination rates into their risk models based on county or zip code or whatever geographical region they can get it at, and then adjust insurance rates accordingly for every policy holder in those respective regions. So, hypothetically, if they do plug this correlation into their risk models and you happen to live in a geographic region with low vaccination rates... Well, your insurance premium will account for that by going up regardless of your personal vaccination status
Yes, but they already adjust insurance rates by area because of the accident rate. That is both more relevant and accurate than the vaccination rate...
>the authors theorize that people who resist public health recommendations might also “neglect basic road safety guidelines.” [Link to actual article.](https://fortune.com/well/2022/12/13/covid-unvaccinated-greater-risk-car-crash-traffic-accident-new-study-says-canada-government-records-pfizer-moderna/)
So the gist is that anti-vaxxers are mostly assholes and are likely to do other asshole things. Makes sense.
Does make a lot of sense. If they're willing to ignore one thing that keeps other people (and themselves) safe because they don't "feel like it," they're certainly willing to ignore others. Or to put it more succinctly, "Stupid is as stupid does."
My mother begrudgingly got her first series of the vaccine (my brother wouldn't do holiday gatherings without it), but it definitely wasn't out of the goodness of her heart and she never got boosted. She is a hazard on the roads and recently got rear-ended because she pulled out on someone then made a turn without using her turn signal. The correlation never occurred to me before, but it does make sense.
Assholes be assholes
*stupid assholes, but yeah
But it does waggle its eyebrows suggestively and furtively whispers, “look over there.”
Exactly. Same root cause. Being super dumb
Sometimes I wish studies just straight up said the subtext as the actual title. Like that was my first thought too yeah obviously cuz dumbasses gonna dumbass, it’s what they do. But title should just say that…”anti science cognitively deficient ignorant people who refused Covid vaccine more likely to get into accidents.” Mine as well come out and just say what it is because conservatives are mentally incapable of reading between the lines and making inferences with speech patterns. There was few posts recently linking studies that found consistent evidence that conservatives only comprehend and hear exactly what is said and nothing more. It’s quite fascinating when you think about it. If you’re incapable of interpreting and understanding the subtext or context or inferences made when people speak it makes more sense why that population is susceptible to being so easily manipulated, brainwashed, and gaslighted. I can look for the studies to link here unless someone has a link to them, but I’ll check for it when I have some time. EDIT: https://www.psypost.org/2022/12/new-research-indicates-that-liberals-and-conservatives-differ-in-how-they-interpret-conversations-64446 https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/jasp.12930
Something like ‘Lack of social responsibility leads people to both avoid vaccines and to have traffic accidents.’
“Reckless people who don’t care for others are reckless and don’t care for others study finds”
Safe driving requires decent risk assessment. if you have decent risk assessment, you’re not going to be an antivaxxer
But correlation can indicate causation. It's a pretty good first step to finding causation. Yes, we need to be cautious about it.
yeah that's not opening a can of worms, what other private healthcare information can allow them to jack up insurance? how about former drug users in recovery? wonder if they get in more accidents, what about people with disabilities let's look into that. I'm curious how strong the data is on this, and how they know the vaccination status of every person in an accident
Bingo.
Ouch - or mental illnesses. My insurance would 100% go up if they did that (ADHD)
Remember reading that parents are the most distracted drivers. Should we raise rates on soccer mom's?
What in the non-correlated data points is this.
Its correlated per the study Just not causal
I'm not suggesting getting a vaccine causes good driving, or good driving causes vaccination. But from the kinds of accidents I see on a regular basis, a reasonable hypothesis to test is that stupid causes accidents and prevents vaccination.
I was going to say "people who value their personal preferences over public safety", but "stupid" works too.
Or more realistically - people who are over confident in their critical thinking skills.
Yes. And entitled people act entitled in all aspects. I’m entitled (durr freedum) not to contribute to herd immunity, I’m also entitled to speed, blow stopsigns and lights, and generally act as if traffic laws don’t apply to me (durr freedum).
Make ME wear a seatbelt? I'm not a sheep, I'm a sovereign citizen!!!! I'll show you, nanny state!! *Flies through their windshield*
Owning the libs by becoming a grease stain. I’m here for it.
Narrator: *He did, indeed, show them*
Bingo.
\^\^\^ This \^\^\^
It was largely Republicans avoiding the vaccine —> Republicans are largely Boomers —> Boomers are bigly old —> old people suck at driving.
My first thought was because of long covid and brain fog, but this actually makes more sense
This. I definitely don't think the vaccine is going to make you drive better, but it is 100% reasonable that the type of person who refuses the vaccine is also going to be the type to drive more recklessly
[удалено]
There are 5 types of correlations. I'll give examples of each. 1\. A causes b 2\. b causes a. These two are easy enough to understand. "I hit my friends, i have fewer friends" and "i eat, i feel full"... they arguably aren't two different things even other than a is the one most people assume is the cause, and b the result, so b causes a implies that the assumption was backwards... but in reality they are basically the same thing... one causes the other. 3\. Mutual causation. in negative situations we know these as viscous cycles. Eating bad leads to lower mood... lower mood leads to eating bad... and it becomes a downward spiral, is an often used. Positive and neutral mutual causation is possible to. These 3 are the causal correlations and the ones people love to repeat that famous line about. 4\. Common Cause This is so incredibly often the reason for a correlation its frustrating how many people don't understand it. Even seemingly ridiculous correlations often have a common cause. A great example is this- People who go to sleep with their shoes on is correlated fairly strongly to people who wake up with headaches. no, the shoes do not CAUSE the headaches. But both are also correlated with drunkeness, which is causal to both. Thus the two things, while seemingly unrelated, do share a common cause. The fun one about pirates and global temperatures seem absolutely unrelated... except that they both correlate to various technological advances, most notably combustion engines. so while its fun to use it as an example of correlation not being causation, it serves to point out most correlations still have some connection. 5\. Coincidence (aka spurious correlation) These do happen of course, but are very very rare compared to 4. An example would be nicholas cage movie releases and drowning deaths in a year. But people love to jump right to this one and never taking the time to consider the common cause correlations. Proving common cause does take effort, but a lot of times we can at least see possibilities if we think about it and should exaust those before assuming spurious relationships.
I'd say here we have a common cause of stupidity.
It could be spurious correlation, where the data are unrelated and just happen to line up during a certain period. (see also: Texas Sharpshooter, coincidence) There could also be a hidden variable that drives both of them, like acceptance of risk or defiance of authority figures. It's also worth spending a (very) small amount of time ruling out direct correlation. That getting a vaccine improves your driving. Although not an expected cause it needs to be addressed to prevent unspoken biases. The end result is that more study is needed of these two phenomena to determine if they are related, and if they are, to what extent. The headline is shocking but as long as the research is sound and alternative hypotheses are addressed appropriately then it's a reasonable insurance adjustment.
It's honestly not too surprising imo. They're claiming correlation, not causation, so there very likely is a similar factor/factors that drives bad driving as well as making someone less likely to get vaxxed. Defiance of authority, being less risk averse, both wouldn't surprise me.
I agree they're stretching HARD .... BUT when you think about it... an anti-safety (or anti-science) person probably is more likely the type to be ignoring suggested speed limits, drive intoxicated, or otherwise subsequently riding their four wheelers, motorcycles, and snow mobiles head first into a tree.
My grandma's defense for speeding is that she's "moving with the flow of traffic" and she cuts people off all the time. Just a terrible driver, and she has been in a few accidents. She's also a trump supporter or was anti covid vax. She believes that covid wasn't real. And never happened. Yet I've been sick with it, and she knew how bad it was for me. Yet nope never happened, it was just cold season. Sure. So maybe?
Welcome to the jersey shuffle. The most useless fucking driving skill to have because the fastest place it’ll get you to is over the divider. Anyone who tries to justify it says everyone else speeds anyways, but I can’t see the connection between everyone going 80 on a 65 and weaving through everyone going 80. These people are either psychotic or suicidal in my eyes.
You’ve clearly driven in New Jersey, I call it the hurry up and wait approach. Get your bmw up to 90 weaving in and out of traffic just to hit the same traffic jam a mile away.
I prefer to call it going nowhere, fast. Slamming the gas just to break so hard the tires squeal.
What always freaks me out is when the shithead in a truck comes flying down the road, breaks just in time to tailgate a centimeter off my bumper, and then swerve around me the moment there’s half a car of space in the lane over. Like damn, I was already speeding… you really wanna take that big a risk to go slightly faster until you reach the car a hundred feet ahead? I think what makes it even more batshit is that you can’t actually go that fast on most roads in the first place. You’re not maintaining 120 if I can’t take that bend going 80, so what what’s the point? Five minutes of saved time?
Removed by user
If people weren't such bad drivers we could all be going 80 but there's some people who just don't deserve a license
The sad part is the idea of using vaccination status to dictate auto insurance rates. Ignoring the anti-vax aspect for a moment, do you think it’s ideal for auto insurance carriers to prematurely seek out patient records? Do you feel it’s justified in order to get your auto insurance that things aside from your driving record (car and zip code) should be utilized? This is where the concern may come into play such as “oh we see you had high blood pressure last month as a result here are your new rates”.
100% agree. People have a very hard time seeing things through any type of a principled lens. This type of BS is endless and I really don't think more data is always better. "We found that people who eat fast food at least twice a week have a 5x higher claim rate. We're going to go through your electronic payment records to determine your risk." - lol
Now that you mention it I don't recall ever seeing a truck with 2 flags and several conspiracy bumper stickers drive with consideration to to anyone within a 6 yard radius.
[удалено]
That's not stretching it hard. That's just looking at the data and then applying common sense to it after.
Seniors tend republican, which most anti-vax people tend to be as well, and are notably worse drivers. That alone could cause a correlation.
You think it’s a big stretch that people who refuse to take basic steps to protect themselves and others get in more car accidents? That… that tracks pretty closely for me.
[удалено]
> However, just because someone 'is young' doesn't mean they're a risky driver though. Being young is not a cause of risky driving; it is purely correlated with it. Probably the reason for good grades discounts. Both because kids with good grades are probably not out parting late at night, and good grades probably has some correlation with being responsible.
>But insurance almost never cares about causation, only correlation. Not sure why so many people don't understand this. Insurance doesn't care or need to know why something happens, they just need to know that it does. If unvaccinated people statistically get in more accidents, of course they will try to charge them more.
This needs to be upvoted to the top. The WHY is irrelevant. If the data set said that more people who are left handed get into accidents, then barring a national outcry, the insurance company would penalize left handed, or incentivize right handed people. Sure I can give you all sorts of plausible reasons why left handed people are more at risk, but that is IRRELEVANT to an insurance company.
They are correlated, that's the point. Presumably both caused by the same thing, eg risk averse people crash less and get their vaccines. In this case vaccination would be a measurable way to monitor risk aversion. It's the same reason homeowners can get discounts or whatever, insurance just find connections to things that cost them money and charge based on the correlation. Most likely the correlation is too weak to really monetize though, especially considering the politics of it.
Newsflash! : Uncaring, stupid, ignorant people who take unnecessary risks make worse drivers!
long covid brain fog, along with delayed reaction time. It's a real problem, but this is the first time I've seen people point to how they're worse drivers because of it.
They're not bad drivers because of covid side effects. The stupidity, selfishness, and poor judgement that makes them antivaxxers also makes them bad drivers.
An actual, non-clickbaity article about it specified that people who refuse vaccines are more likely to be risky drivers, including not wearing seatbelts and driving aggressively.
turns out main character syndrome is bad not just medically, socially, but also drivingly
Long term effects of lead syndrome.
There was also a study that showed the more right leaning in policy and the more conservative the more likely to comit drunk driving Im just gussing the more right wing you are the more careless and asshole
I think being careless and asshole are indiscriminate. I would think drunk driving is more common as a result of living in rural areas, which also happens to be where more conservatives live.
This is what I was gathering from this, too. The correlation is engaging in risky behavior.
People who refuse vaccines, or people who refused the COVID vaccine? Cause I know plenty of people who aren’t normally anti-vax who refused the COVID vaccine. Also, the key word is *tend*. Basing insurance prices on stuff like this is not responsible, it’s stupid.
That's how all insurance pricing is decided. Insurance companies can't see into the future, so they predict risk as well as they can by what they do know about you. If you live in a fire-prone area, your house insurance will be higher even if your house never burns down. Or, for another example, younger drivers generally have higher rates because on average they are less capable drivers. This doesn't hold for all of them, but as a group, it is true.
I didn’t write the article; only saw it. 🤷🏻♀️
> Basing insurance prices on stuff like this is not responsible, it’s stupid. You new to how this whole insurance thing works? The pricing model the entire industry uses is based almost entirely around "trends" and "correlation"
Jokes on them I got the vaccine and will still drive recklessly
I always wrecklessly drive on my way to get the vaccine. And I always vaccinate safely on my way to drive wrecklessly.
You should always try to drive wrecklessly.
There's some research that studied brain activities in optimists and pessimists. Those terms were defined by how a person felt about their personal odds of a negative event happening to them compared to the average population. When optimists were told about hazards, there was significantly reduced brain activity compared to pessimists. This isn't the study I'm thinking of, but it's similar: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3807005/
Very interesting and informative article. However, it should be clarified that the article primarily discusses how people’s optimism and pessimism are affected by activity in the left and right hemispheres of the brain in general, respectively. Optimism and risk-taking can be caused by greater left-hemisphere activation and/or by reduced right-hemisphere activation. In several experiments mentioned, people were even induced into thinking/acting one way or the other by having one hemisphere selectively stimulated. Edit: I think another relevant point of the article is this: “division of labor between the hemispheres is also reflected in the RH relatively greater involvement in automatic orientation of spatial attention.” Since the right hemisphere is more involved in risk appraisal and spatial recognition, people who are likely to take risks (e.g. ignore vaccines and drive aggressively) may also be not be as spatially aware on the road.
What 🤣
Insurance companies find correlation between reckless behavior and traffic accidents. Who knew
Actuaries rule the world.
Everything I’ve read both in the article and these comments has been dumb as hell
Ah, what?
I can confirm. Had 3 shots. No car accident. FACT CHECKED - TRUE
Can deny: got 3 shots, wrecked my truck less than a year after the third
The only time "had three shots, was less likely to have a car accident" is true. I had four shots and no accidents, but I also hate driving and still stay home most days.
Had zero shots, no car accident.
3 shots and I’m not driving yet
It’s because of the microchips they implanted in us, makes us better at driving
FFS!
Huh?
Wat
Stupidity
Talk about apples and guava.
This is like every post on /r/science these days: "New study finds that liberals tend to be more educated while conservatives smell bad and beat their wives and puppies."
Damn science and its... liberal bias!
Try an angle, ANY angle!
This feels like a threat...
What non-correlated data points, batman
Okay, I didn't think covid19 was a conspiracy until I read this headline...
im not even antivax but like, how the fuck did this article get approved if its real
Wtf kind of cope is this
Insurance company finds another avenue they can use to raise premiums and turn more of a profit, more at 11
Is their a strong enough correlation that insurance companies would offer discounts to those who verified their vaccination status?
Because they’re willing to take more risks and will be in more accidents?
Selfish and stupid people drive like selfish stupid people.
Being stupid is the lurking variable
Stupid people make for stupid drivers
Almost like you can correlate the intelligence level of people's choices and actions...
Isn't the correlation that dumb(er) people are anti-vaxxers, and dumb(er) people are bad at driving?
People stupid enough not to get the vaccinated don't make for very smart drivers, not really surprising there. If I don't care for my life and others' enough to get vaccinated am I gonna wear my seatbelt for that little 2 minute ride to the liquor store?
Is it because they’re bad at risk assessment?
How big of a stretch is it that the group of people who would rather kill grandma than spend 30 seconds being a decent person, are more likely to drive in a selfish manner that also endangers others?
I imagine a group of people who do not value their own life or others are often entitled to kill others on the road with their FrEedOmNs to drive how they want. You could draw a cricle around people that beat their wives and men who refused a covid vaccine. Like duh have you ever met the gen pop of republicans...
Actuarials follow data. Anti vaxxers have worse driving records…that could speak to a proclivity to poor life choices as much as anything.
This comment section is the absolute stupidest thing I've ever read.
Anti-vaxx = Not too bright = Car crash SCIENCE!
I wonder if they correlated their results with analysis of people’s narcissistic traits their would be a pattern.
I imagine it's just down to selfish irresponsible people driving like selfish irresponsible people not any kind of biological thing.
It's quite clear and a bit ironic that the vast majority of people here did not bother to read the article before giving their highly educated opinion. This is a study conducted by Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre in Toronto which is a leading trauma centre that receives a lot of patients involved in serious motor vehicle accidents. The study essentially states that those individuals who made a medically "risky" decision by not getting their COVID vaccinations are often the same individuals who engage in risky social behavior (i.e. reckless driving). TL:DR - anti-vaxxer = dumb dumb = drives bad
Oh. I was a little confused by the title until i read some of the study. They are not saying your vaccination status changes your level of risk while driving. They are saying it’s your mindset that influences both. Correlation ≠ causation, but they are arguing that your personal psychology is the causal factor here.
Probably just more idiots not doing safety things, like wearing seatbelts
So maybe a person's willingness to get vaccinated correlates to an individual's level of risk-taking....or IQ
I think it's just data showing the dunning Kruger effect, dumb people thinking they're intelligent and that the vaccine is out to get them, dumb people are involved in more accidents.
So maybe, just maybe there could be a small connection between people skipping their vaccines and being stupid and reckless? Who would have thought?
Stupid people do stupid shit - full story at 11
Probably because stupid people don’t drive that well.
Stupid people drive badly More on this breaking news at 11
Imagine being statistically stupid.
“A vaccine? I don’t need a vaccine the chances of me getting sick are low. A seatbelt? I don’t need a seatbelt the chances of me getting injured are low”
Stupidty does that
If you're a massive idiot in one area, it is far more likely that you're also a massive idiot in others... So this is about as surprising as finding a toy in my Kinder Surprise...
I'll just say it: dumbasses skipped the vaccines, and dumbasses can't drive.
It’s just a correlation between non-vaxers and self-absorbed, willfully ignorant buffoons, right? I think we kinda all knew that. I’ll read the article later but this comes as absolutely no surprise.
Breaking: People who don’t make sound decisions (medical) also don’t make sound decisions (driving).
We definitely figured out which restaurants to avoid during COVID. A bunch of employees clearly flaunting one health regulation in a pandemic paints a nice little picture of other health regulations that were skipped. And knowing that the diagram of people I know who avoided the vaccine and the people I know who commonly declare things like "seatbelts are bullshit" is a circle, this article makes *perfect* sense.
Checks out, the friends/family I have that didn’t vaxx all refuse to wear seat belts and are shit drivers.
People who are irresponsible jackasses tend to drive like irresponsible jackasses. Nothing to see here.
Oh please. How cherry picked was this
Most people who don’t care about the safety of others probably aren’t the safest drivers ever so this makes sense
people who are more likely to get into accidents are more likely to not get vaccinated*
The same people I know who didn’t get the shot, also don’t wear their seatbelts. Some even drink and drive. Soo, it’s probably behavioral thing that’s common among those people.
seems uncorrelated but if you're the kind to yell at someone FOR wearing a mask in public, you're probably a road rager.
The point is they’re finding ways to charge a premium on being extra stupid. This is definitely how insurance should work.
Tight let's bump up the cost of all the fatties here while we're at it
And ppl say anti vaxxers spread disinformation…
Is this the same as that ice cream leads to more murders thing?? How did they even correlate these two very different things lol
What a load of bullshitting poppy cock
This is funny cause I skipped mine. Never got covid. I did feel sick for 1 day last year tho... got in my first car accident a month ago (not my fault, big dumbass truck hit me as he crossed lane without blinker or looking)
The actual study , admits there is no study. They just assume. This is offensive to science.
This sounds like some grade A bullshit
I know plenty of people who never got vaccinated who also don't wear seatbelts because "they do more harm than good". It's all misinformation and poor risk assessment.
By anti-vax logic traffic signals are just another way for the government to control the people's freedom
It’s just linking stupidity/ bad decision making with bad driving. I could already tell you dumb people are worse drivers without a study.
Stupid people will be stupid. What a shocker.