bb Albert Provocateur: Motor Madness

Albert Provocateur

Saturday, July 15, 2006

Motor Madness

“Rev it up,” “blow the engine,” “pole position,” and “four to the floor,” calls to arms of despondent youths who equate manhood and testosterone levels with the length of a rubber trail, rather than with what lies beneath the left side of a rib cage. Now, “boys will be boys,” but a six-pack, racing tires, and a pretty copilot can transform the “apple of a mother’s eye” into something far more terrifying than the imagination of Mary Shelley or Bram Stoker. A new cultural phenomenon or simply a right of passage?
Motor-vehicle crashes are the leading cause of death in the United States for persons ages 1-34, according to the National Center for Health Statistics. Thirty-eight percent (15,794) of U.S. traffic fatalities in 1999 were alcohol-related; on average, drinking and driving killed a human being every 31 minutes. Furthermore, about 3 in every 10 Americans will be involved in an alcohol-related crash at some time in their lives. If that were not enough, from 1995 to 1996, alcohol-related traffic fatalities among youths ages 15-20 increased by nearly 10%, from 1,473 to 1,617.
We all know that mixing alcohol and other drugs with driving leads to potentially fatal impairment. Like a concoction of oil and water, or the mating of a supermodel with a nerd, they simply don’t mix. It doesn’t take a brain surgeon to know that blood alcohol concentration (BAC), expressed as the percentage of alcohol in deciliters of blood - for example, 0.10% is equal to 0.10 grams per deciliter, correlates with the risk of fatal traffic accidents. Compared with drivers who have not consumed alcohol, the risk of a single-vehicle fatal crash for drivers with BACs between 0.02% and 0.04% is estimated to be 1.4 times higher; for those with BACs between 0.05% and 0.09%, 11.1 times higher; for drivers with BACs between 0.10% and 0.14%, 48 times higher; and, finally, for those with BACs at or above 0.15%, the risk is estimated to be 380 times higher.
What can we do? Who can we turn to for help? After all, even our ministers and priests have been known to take an occasional “snort” or two. Our therapeutic thrust must follow seven lines of reasoning. First, we must examine risk factors such as personality, social environment, anxiety, depression, loneliness, genetics, and type of drug. Second, family, friends, or co-workers must take an active role in persuading a loved one to undergo screening for drug addiction. Third, family physicians must be reminded that a diagnosis of drug addiction often starts with them. Fourth, we must be aware of the disruptions wreaked on our family, work, social, school, legal, and financial lives by dependence on drugs. Fifth, the expedience of detoxification on an outpatient basis must be contemplated. Next, parents must be educated to communicate, listen, set a good example, and establish a strong, stable bond with their children. And, finally, counseling services, treatment programs, and self-help groups must be sought out after detoxification has run its course.
“Wired, tired and perspired” is neither safe nor acceptable behavior when driving a motor vehicle or checking-in at an airport.

Copyright 2003, Albert M. Balesh, M.D. All rights reserved.

2 Comments:

Post a Comment

<< Home