Drink and Driving

Hawke's Bay Tribune, Volume XXVI, Issue 110, 22 April 1936, Page 8

Drink and Driving

ALCOHOL’S EFFECTS

Vision and Alertness May Be Impaired

ADDRESS BY A DuTi'Oß

Addressing the Napier Round Table Club yesterday on '‘Alcohol and the Motorist,” Dr. Harold Berry stated that It was not only when a man was drunk that Ins senses were dulled by alcohol, but that the consumption of a very small amount would result iu lack of co-ordination between the eye and muscular reactions, a slowness of reaction, and a loss of Ile visual powers of the eyes and their focussing ability. He quoted figures to show that the co-ordination of eye, hand, and foot was considerably retarded by alcohol, saying that of the two types of vision, central and peripheral vision, each was slowed up by two per cent, and eleven per cent respectively by a quantity of alcohol equal to four ounces of whisky.

Central vision was an ordinary type of vision which registered objects on the brain, and peripheral vision was that type which discerned moving objects. Alcohol also prolonged the reaction time, or the time taken between the image striking the retina of the eye, and an impression being conveyed to the braiu, while it also slowed up the actual movements of the muscles of the eyeball. “ A man has not to be dead drunk to show these changes," said Dr. Berry. ‘‘They are produced by two and a half to four ounces of whisky, and retain their effect up to three and a quarter hours.”

Between this stage and the stage when a man becomes completely drunk, there 'was a further progression which adversely affected binocular vision, which controlled the judgment of dis tance, depth, and. time. From tests made in England, it had been shown that one glass of beer will prolong the reaction time in a simple action by 9.7 per cent., of the ordinary time, and more complicated movements to a greater ex tent. Yet another effect of alcohol was that, it interfered with the gift of selfcriticism, so that a man who was under the influence of drink might be driving his car in an extremely careless and reckless way, but still believed that ne was driving well, NOT A STIMULANT.

‘‘l want to impress on you that alcohol is a uarcotie, a poison,” said the speaker. ‘'lt lias never been a stimulant, and never will be ” The doctor asked his audience to apply these various effects of drink to the case of a man driving a car at 40 miles per hour. With perfect brakes, the cur would travel 100 feet before stopping if the time between seeing the object and the feet operating the brakes was three-fifths of a second. If the time was one and one-fifth seconds the distance would be 140 feet. If, therefore, alcohol slowed perception by the eyes, nerve impulses, and muscular movements as well, those times of ihrce-fiftlm uf a second and one and one-fifth seconds, the range of times for tho normal individual would be eousideiably increased, with the result that the car would travel considerably further tliau 140 feet before slopping. That difference, the result of alcohol, might be tho cause of a serious accident.

From figures available from analysis or deaths in England, it was stated by Dr. Berry that between 1926 and 1933 in Great Britain, 50,837 were killed and 1.471,920 injured iu road accidents. Dealing with the question of alcohol in those accidents, it was stated chat, in 1933, of the 3297 cases of death iu road accidents attributable to the driver, alcohol was blamed in 29 cases, wliile iu the 3607 death attributable to pedestrians, 46 eases were set dowu to alcohol. This meant that less than one per cent, of deaths in English and Scottish road accidents were caused by alcohol.

New Zealand figures were also produced for 1934 and 1935, when there were 175 and 178 deaths in road accidents respectively. Of these 14 in 1935 and nine last year were attributed to mild drunkenness, three in each year to excessive drunkenness, and six and four respectively to drunkenness on the part of a pedestrian. A meeting held iu London in Juue of last year, at which the foremost medical men, justices and solicitors were represented, a conclusion was reached that a fairly severe degree of intoxication should be proved before the motorist was convicted. No speaker at the meeting supported the popular view that a very slight degree of alcoholism was capable of depriving many motorists of proper control. TESTS FOR DRUNKENNESS. Many police surgeons attuned that when a drunken man was arrested and placed through a medical examination, he rapidly sobered from the shock oi his position. Dr. Berry said that lie did not dispute this at all, but that the opposite effect was likely to take place wnen a sober man was arrested. This man, being sober, would realise the awkwardness of his position, aud become irritable. His pulse would quicken, his eyes dilate, and his speech become difficult. Iu snort, through sheer nervousness, he would display all the signs which a police surgeou looked for in a drunkard. Police methods of determining drunkenness were also unsatisfactory in such cases, as the same reasons would hold good. Such everyday actions as taking off the coat aud waistcoat, putting them on again and buttoning them up, and opening a door with a key, could be used instead of «uch tests as walking a line. The speaker mentioned that a doctor, giving evidence of a man’s drunkenness in court, was once challenged to perform the tests himself. He failed to do so.

The speaker concluded by saying that he was in favour of the avowed intention of the lion. R. Semple, of declaring war on the drunken motorist, but that ho did appeal for the benefit of any doubt being given in eases where tho effect of a little alcohol some hours before, combined with the fact that no food had been taken, placed a perfectly sober man in a false position.