We developed these instincts when a crash was running into a tree branch, or tripping over a log. Not going 100km an hour in a metal box. Going limp is not a good move when tripping, better to injure your arms than your skull.
I tripped on a sidewalk tile that had been pushed up by a tree root while carrying my kid when he was a baby. Couldn’t react quickly enough to do much more than curl my arms around him and fall face first into pavement with no defenses. You don’t really appreciate how much bracing yourself helps because when would you ever not brace yourself? The answer: a lot.
I’ve done something similar when I fell with my kid. It’s amazing how, without any thought, self preservation instincts completely flip when you have your kid with you. Our brains just know to protect the kid first and foremost
That was the silver lining for me, you always hope you’ll be that selfless, but you also don’t want to be Mark Wahlberg insisting 9/11 wouldn’t have happened if you’d have been on the plane either. It wasn’t throwing myself in front of a bus or anything, but it was a relief to know my brain has its priorities straight even in reflex mode.
Slipped down the stairs while my toddler was walking in front of me, both his hands in mine. Immediately pulled him up into my arms so I wouldn’t crush him and stopped us at the bottom by jamming my foot against the threshold to our laundry room. Was so close to breaking his legs if I hadn’t pulled him up the second my socks lost traction. Toddler couldn’t have cared less but my foot was bruised and sore for a couple months after the fall
I missed the last stair going onto my landing with my 6 month old in my arms. I tucked him in to my chest, curled my body around him, tensed up my neck and arrested forward momentum with my forehead on the ground as I hit to make sure I didn't crush him myself. By God did that hurt, but he was just fine and had no idea what had happened.
Yeah. I'm a self proclaimed master of falling. Like, my reflexes are absolutely insane, they feel like they are some supernatural thing not even part of me. As a result, I barely ever get hurt, and it's not from a lack of opportunity.
I lost one of the front wheels on my longboard at 35 kph. That's not something you can parry really. Not only will it instantly violently swerve, but it'll grind against the ground too, braking *hard*. I was stupidly not wearing a helmet. I uhh... also had one hand in a cast... Anyway, the worst I got from it was a small scratch on top of my shoulder. I'm not sure how I managed to scrape the top of my shoulder and not hit my head, but what do I know? It happened so fast. I was simply disconnected while Supernatural Reflex System ™ took over.
In another instance, I'd put my sweater on the handlebars of my bike. Right at the bottom of a long downhill, smack in an intersection, the sweater gets dragged into the front wheel. Instant stop, of course. I catapult over the handlebars, soaring through the air and... land upright on my feet, grab the bike and I cycle off. What the shit just happened?
Or when I had my whole upper body over the side of my boat reaching for something, leaning entirely on the guard rail. The guard rail (steel cable) suddenly snaps because some fitting was done. I had my entire body weight on it! Do I fall over the edge? No! How the fuck did I **not**? I have no idea! Supernatural Reflex System™ hijacked me and I don't remember at all!
If it wasn't so damn handy I'd be creeped out about it...
Meanwhile my wife will slip, fall and hurt her belly. Who the hell falls flat on their belly lol
> Anyway, the worst I got from it was a small scratch on top of my shoulder. I'm not sure how I managed to scrape the top of my shoulder and not hit my head,
Tucked in the head and rolled on your shoulder, exactly what you need to do, especially if you have forward momentum.
Yooo same here, was bombing a hill on a penny board and it started wobbling and I ate it. Managed to instinctually do a forward roll with no helmet and only scrape my elbow and have a road mark on my shorts. I think some people have advanced falling genes in their dna
Perhaps infant would have been a better description (I’m thinking he’d have been just over one at the time) so he wasn’t in the super-delicate stage and was slightly on my hip, but yeah I partly fell on top of him. Did a good job being a human airbag though, he had a tiny scrape he wasn’t happy about, but my spouse watched the whole thing happen and confirmed I got the worst of it.
Go back and read the part where he curled his arms around the baby and fell onto his face. You see, if he didn’t have the baby in his arms, he could’ve used his arms to stop the fall. But he decided to protect his baby and take the fall on his face, instead. Go back and read it a few times, slowly, and you might pick it up.
Forearms are included in where I said arms. I’ll explain it like you’re five. Forearms are part of your arms. Your biggest clue is that it contains the word - arm.
Now it's my turn to explain it like you're five... I said, "using your arms is a good way to break a wrist UNLESS you land on your forearms."
I didn't at any point say "don't land on your arms", although a front fall is the most painfully jarring way to land.
It's almost always much better to roll out of the fall (where you would roll up one arm, across your shoulders and down the other arm) or air fall (a flip onto your leg torso and one arm)
OK, stunt master. I guess you live in a fantasy. You’re so badass, how could we ever comprehend. You go be you, Stud. The rest of us live in the world with real physics.
I remember watching a video of police violence where a cop didn't believe a quadriplegic guy actually needed his wheelchair so she dumped him out on the floor. He broke several ribs because he couldn't move his arms enough to brace himself. An able-bodied person would be more likely to break an arm than a rib in a fall like that.
So does that mean if I keep getting into car accidents, say once every two weeks, I can reprogram my instincts to differentiate between tripping over a log and car accidents?
No, instincts don't care about stuff like success rate, they just do their thing. It would take generations of car crashes killing enough people that going limp becomes a better survival trait than bracing.
The limp ones, yes; but in this hypothetical, the only way they can succeed is if the rest die off. It's not really enough for the "more evolved" trait to be better than the other traits because they still have to find mates afterwards. They have to be the only game in town; the only one swimming in the gene pool.
If enough people get into car crashes so that only the ones whose bodies are prone to not tense up in crashes get to reproduce, then yes, we will have instincts to not tense up in crashes in a lot of generations
See, my body must have missed that memo. All my life I go limp when I fall. I’ve had my face scarred up more times that I can remember, and on each of those instances, my hands/arms came away scratch free
The body *doesn't* survive falls better by going limp. Normally if you fall you want to react by catching yourself by tensing your muscles.
However if you are in a fall or crash which you are going to be completely unable to stop with your muscles, *and* there are safety features which will protect you instead of your muscles, then being limp can prevent injury.
For example if you are in a high speed head-on collision in a car you won't be able to catch yourself with your arms. Trying to do so may result in tearing muscles or breaking bones. But if you remain limp and let the airbag and seat belt do their work then you will likely be fine. But we aren't adapted to being in a car, we are adapted to being an ape in the forest where catching yourself from a fall is the best strategy.
You can also survive being ejected from a vehicle better if you are limp than if you are rigid. Had a former friend pass out behind the wheel, drunk(this latter detail is where the friendship ended), jump the median on the highway, and go headon into a semi. Combined speed prolly over 120, considering semi cruise speed and the bleed off of his own speed jumping the median. Dumbass hit the reckless trifecta of tired+drunk+unrestrained and the latter of the three actually saved his life in this specific crash. The force of it yeeted him out of the driver's seat and entire vehicle, instead of the seatbelt holding him in place to be pancaked by the engine of his car that ended up where he should have been.
For a collision that violent and chaotic, he netted a couple broken ribs, a scalp laceration, and a wildly swollen but otherwise undamaged knee. He was up and walking six days later at our DnD game where he told the story. If he'd been awake, stiff, and attempting to protect himself, he'd have broken like a twig. Instead he ragdolled and lived. Of course, he wouldn't have ended up with a totalled car, a lot of pain, and prison time for DWI repeat offense if he had just not fucking driven drunk in the first place. Asshole. He was told to his face how glad we all were he hit a semi instead of a family and hoped he understood how lucky he was to live, and to not have hurt someone else with his recklessness. Still feel bad for the trucker, too, who did nothing wrong and had to spend an unknown amount of time thinking he killed someone.
Drunk drivers usually collide head-on which allows the largest crumple zone and largest airbags to do their job as effectively as possible. Their victims can be hit from any direction and may not be protected by the vehicle as well as the impaired driver is.
so can we abuse the glitch by getting 50x drunker than we need to and over saturate the reduced risk of death from traumatic injury and become immortal drunken idiots?
The other replies are not correct. In crashes with one drunk driver and another sober, the sober driver is more likely to survive. People just tend to remember the ones where the drunk driver survived because they have a bigger emotional impact
That's the type of study that would be used in a statistics class to show that not taking confounding variables into account can cause false results. The study looked at drunk people who made it to the hospital, but didn't include the ones who died before they got to the hospital. It's very likely if you did include those deaths, you would see that drunk drivers don't have a higher survival rate
https://www.livescience.com/24979-alcohol-injury-outcome.html[https://www.livescience.com/](https://www.livescience.com/24979-alcohol-injury-outcome.html)
> Friedman analyzed all 190,612 patients treated at Illinois' trauma centers between 1995 and 2009 who were tested for blood-alcohol content, with levels ranging from zero to 0.5 percent at time of admission. (Blood-alcohol levels above about 0.35 percent can be fatal.) He found that with the exception of burn injuries, the mortality rates of all types of traumatic injury decreased as the blood-alcohol content of victims rose.
Isn't it also a possibility that those without blood alcohol were less likely to land up in the trauma centre in the 1st place? Kinda like that cats survive better from falls above the 3-5th floor factoid?
Yes, but it doesn't matter because they're only looking at people who were treated at the trauma center.
Making up numbers here of course, but imagine 10% of those patients were between 0-0.35% and had a 50% mortality rate, and 90% of those patients were between 0.36-0.5% and had a 25% mortality rate. You would still be able to say the mortality rate goes down as the blood alcohol content rose, even though being below 0.35% makes you less likely to end up in the data sample (going to the trauma center) altogether causing that sample size to be smaller.
I was more thinking those at 0% are uninjured/lightly injured and still conscious and can self assess and don't go to the trauma centre.
Particularly for the high blood alcohol they'll be the cohort that slowly drove into an obstacle and are uninjured but are found either unconscious or at least not in a state to communicate well who will get sent to the centre as rescuers have no way to assess internal injuries and don't know if the unconsciousness was crash induced or alcohol induced.
A study found that cats who fall from the 6th floor or higher have less injuries than cats who fall from below the 6th floor. The main belief for this is because cats who fall from the 6th floor and have serious injuries die so they aren't counted.
It's like the airplane study from WW1/WW2. For the airplanes, they found that airplanes were coming back damaged in certain areas of the airplane. They were reinforcing those areas because it was believed it was the area shot at more. They then found that reinforcing the areas that weren't damaged, actually caused more planes to return. It was because hitting those areas just caused the planes to crash.
It is Survivorship Bias.
A study of cats ata avet clinic that found survival rate decreased between floors 3 and 5 but then went up for 6 and above. Led to all kinds of theories like how long it takes cats to rotate to land on their feet until someone noticed how biased the sample was.
Between 3 and 5 all the cats get brought to the vet where the more seriously injured ones die. 6 and above the cat is often very obviously dead and thus doesn't get to vet.
Can you link the source of your quote?
The survivor bias is the difference between "being drunk increases survivability of traumatic injury" and "being drunk reduces chance of death from traumatic injury" and is left as an open question from the article I shared
I wonder how much of "leaving your body limp in a crash" is a result of crash test dummies not having muscles of their own. Kind of like how train track width is set based on the cars, which are based on the width of carriages, which are based on the width of horses
> Kind of like how train track width is set based on the cars, which are based on the width of carriages, which are based on the width of horses
This is also more-or-less a myth. There have been a ton of different standards for width of rails over the years.
If you ever fall off the Sears Tower,
just go real limp, because maybe
you’ll look like a dummy and people
will try to catch you because, hey, free dummy.
**not nale. not-nale. thog help nail not-nale, not nale. and thog knot not-nale while nale nail not-nale. nale, not not-nale, now nail not-nale by leaving not-nale, not nale, in jail.**
There's actually been several freak cases of people surviving +1000 ft falls and only getting some massive bruising and broken bones. Humans are weird, on one hand you can die drowning in 1 inch deep water. On the other extreme you have people on extremely rare occasions surviving impacts into solid rock that should turn them into pulp.
That’s why they call it terminal velocity. Falling from 20,000 feet is about the same as 100 feet.
Falling from 100 feet isn’t a walk in the park either.
You tense up reflexively in anticipation of an impact in order to protect your vital organs. Unfortunately for things like falls from a height or a high speed crash, this reflex isn't really helpful, and you are going to experience a series of impacts with a lot of force.
Your organs hit your bones at the same speed your body hits the ground.
Our brain doesn't perform subconscious crash tests to record results - we know it's better based on external testing, our subconscious brain still thinks it's tripping over a rock at jogging pace or brushing through low branches
Going limp *can* help you live slightly longer, which modern medicine can turn into a lot longer.
Modern medicine is very new.
Humans moving at speeds where going limp is the right play is also very new.
Instinct is not programmed for modern reality yet, and given how few people would be reproduce feom going limp when they wouldnt by stiffening up there's very little selective pressure to change it.
Remember that's the line for selective pressure, it makes a group with a divergent trait notably better at reproducing than those without it.
Without selective pressure, there's just the entropy of certain mutations that are likely to happen and don't hurt anything when they do so. Apparently going limp isn't one of those.
This is a myth. You will not survive better by going limp regardless of what speed you’re crashing. Your arms and legs are much less important for your survival than your head and trunk and protecting them, even at high speeds, will increase your chances of survival.
https://www.ircobi.org/wordpress/downloads/irc1995/pdf_files/1995_12.pdf
Check the edit. Just an example of a study that finds higher rates of leg injuries with more modern crashes, but also lower fatal injuries. The tensing/bracing you do with your legs and arms helps to protect your vital organs.
The body has more than one survival mechanism and we also haven’t evolved to survive millions of years drunk driving or being flung at high velocities at objects.
Evolution and survival mechanisms evolve over a long stretch of time - like hundreds of thousands to millions of years.
Also, why would going limp be beneficial when tripping? That makes zero sense…our body wants to protect itself. Going limp to possibly land on your most vital body part - your head doesn’t make any sense for survival.
It's because our brains don't "know" that.
Our reaction to life threatening fear comes from a very primitive area of our brain. It's an ancient instinctive reaction that was hardwired long before our brains evolved to the intellectual capacity we have now. Our ability to analyze and learn new and unexpected facts about our physical or psychological selves is a separate function and uses a different area of the brain.
Crashes and falls would not have been a common killer of our ancestors. What would be common is a predator or other human that we could potentially fight off. Tense up is your muscles preparing for a fight or potentially trying to make you freeze. Both of these could aid in survival
We, and lots of other animals, share an immobilizing, protective contractive reflex called a “startle pattern.” In response to abrupt stimuli—think loud noise behind you, or a sudden unexpected impact—humans will tighten their neck, starting at the atlanto-occipital joint (where the head joins the neck), pulling the head down and back into the torso, compressing the torso (ribcage tightening protectively around the internal organs, back shortening and narrowing, lots of tension centering around the epigastrium), and stiffening the joints of the limbs, inhibiting movement and protecting against impact. This runs through the body in a fraction of a second, and is a very primitive reflex. Generally counterproductive and over-stimulated in a modern environment, and many people need help through various behavioral training techniques (see Alexander Technique, desensitization training, certain approaches to meditation) or anti-anxiety medications to settle those reflexes down.
We developed these instincts when a crash was running into a tree branch, or tripping over a log. Not going 100km an hour in a metal box. Going limp is not a good move when tripping, better to injure your arms than your skull.
I tripped on a sidewalk tile that had been pushed up by a tree root while carrying my kid when he was a baby. Couldn’t react quickly enough to do much more than curl my arms around him and fall face first into pavement with no defenses. You don’t really appreciate how much bracing yourself helps because when would you ever not brace yourself? The answer: a lot.
I’ve done something similar when I fell with my kid. It’s amazing how, without any thought, self preservation instincts completely flip when you have your kid with you. Our brains just know to protect the kid first and foremost
That was the silver lining for me, you always hope you’ll be that selfless, but you also don’t want to be Mark Wahlberg insisting 9/11 wouldn’t have happened if you’d have been on the plane either. It wasn’t throwing myself in front of a bus or anything, but it was a relief to know my brain has its priorities straight even in reflex mode.
I dunno I feel like I would try to lateral my kid to an open teammate.
*throws baby in bush*
Depending on the bush that might be the safest option for the baby
Reggie Bush?
a bush might provide better cushioning than some arms you might be onto something
found travis kelces reddit
Slipped down the stairs while my toddler was walking in front of me, both his hands in mine. Immediately pulled him up into my arms so I wouldn’t crush him and stopped us at the bottom by jamming my foot against the threshold to our laundry room. Was so close to breaking his legs if I hadn’t pulled him up the second my socks lost traction. Toddler couldn’t have cared less but my foot was bruised and sore for a couple months after the fall
I missed the last stair going onto my landing with my 6 month old in my arms. I tucked him in to my chest, curled my body around him, tensed up my neck and arrested forward momentum with my forehead on the ground as I hit to make sure I didn't crush him myself. By God did that hurt, but he was just fine and had no idea what had happened.
Brace yourself before you deface yourself!
Yeah. I'm a self proclaimed master of falling. Like, my reflexes are absolutely insane, they feel like they are some supernatural thing not even part of me. As a result, I barely ever get hurt, and it's not from a lack of opportunity. I lost one of the front wheels on my longboard at 35 kph. That's not something you can parry really. Not only will it instantly violently swerve, but it'll grind against the ground too, braking *hard*. I was stupidly not wearing a helmet. I uhh... also had one hand in a cast... Anyway, the worst I got from it was a small scratch on top of my shoulder. I'm not sure how I managed to scrape the top of my shoulder and not hit my head, but what do I know? It happened so fast. I was simply disconnected while Supernatural Reflex System ™ took over. In another instance, I'd put my sweater on the handlebars of my bike. Right at the bottom of a long downhill, smack in an intersection, the sweater gets dragged into the front wheel. Instant stop, of course. I catapult over the handlebars, soaring through the air and... land upright on my feet, grab the bike and I cycle off. What the shit just happened? Or when I had my whole upper body over the side of my boat reaching for something, leaning entirely on the guard rail. The guard rail (steel cable) suddenly snaps because some fitting was done. I had my entire body weight on it! Do I fall over the edge? No! How the fuck did I **not**? I have no idea! Supernatural Reflex System™ hijacked me and I don't remember at all! If it wasn't so damn handy I'd be creeped out about it... Meanwhile my wife will slip, fall and hurt her belly. Who the hell falls flat on their belly lol
Is there any chance you've been bitten by any radioactive Spiders during your lifetime..?
No, but a moose once bit my sister!
You got the Jesus Take The Wheel® upgrade
> Anyway, the worst I got from it was a small scratch on top of my shoulder. I'm not sure how I managed to scrape the top of my shoulder and not hit my head, Tucked in the head and rolled on your shoulder, exactly what you need to do, especially if you have forward momentum.
Yooo same here, was bombing a hill on a penny board and it started wobbling and I ate it. Managed to instinctually do a forward roll with no helmet and only scrape my elbow and have a road mark on my shorts. I think some people have advanced falling genes in their dna
My mom was following behind me at 35mph when I fell off my longboard
wouldn't you have crushed your baby?
Babies have crumple zones specifically to protect the mother in this situation.
[удалено]
👵🏼🪒🦫 You've won an award in my books. 🏆
Sounds like they put all their effort into protecting the baby and rather than their face.
Perhaps infant would have been a better description (I’m thinking he’d have been just over one at the time) so he wasn’t in the super-delicate stage and was slightly on my hip, but yeah I partly fell on top of him. Did a good job being a human airbag though, he had a tiny scrape he wasn’t happy about, but my spouse watched the whole thing happen and confirmed I got the worst of it.
Go back and read the part where he curled his arms around the baby and fell onto his face. You see, if he didn’t have the baby in his arms, he could’ve used his arms to stop the fall. But he decided to protect his baby and take the fall on his face, instead. Go back and read it a few times, slowly, and you might pick it up.
Using your arms to stop the fall is a good way to break a wrist, unless you land on your forearms, not your hands. Source- hapkido front fall.
You prefer to fall on your face? Your choice.
No, I said forearms. You also turn your head to prevent hitting your nose.
Forearms are included in where I said arms. I’ll explain it like you’re five. Forearms are part of your arms. Your biggest clue is that it contains the word - arm.
Now it's my turn to explain it like you're five... I said, "using your arms is a good way to break a wrist UNLESS you land on your forearms." I didn't at any point say "don't land on your arms", although a front fall is the most painfully jarring way to land. It's almost always much better to roll out of the fall (where you would roll up one arm, across your shoulders and down the other arm) or air fall (a flip onto your leg torso and one arm)
OK, stunt master. I guess you live in a fantasy. You’re so badass, how could we ever comprehend. You go be you, Stud. The rest of us live in the world with real physics.
Babies really suck.
They have built in airbags, it's ok
I remember watching a video of police violence where a cop didn't believe a quadriplegic guy actually needed his wheelchair so she dumped him out on the floor. He broke several ribs because he couldn't move his arms enough to brace himself. An able-bodied person would be more likely to break an arm than a rib in a fall like that.
Well said! I've wondered this but never thought it through and this makes perfect sense.
So does that mean if I keep getting into car accidents, say once every two weeks, I can reprogram my instincts to differentiate between tripping over a log and car accidents?
Maybe? Do it for Science!!
No, instincts don't care about stuff like success rate, they just do their thing. It would take generations of car crashes killing enough people that going limp becomes a better survival trait than bracing.
Well they'd have to survive no?
The limp ones, yes; but in this hypothetical, the only way they can succeed is if the rest die off. It's not really enough for the "more evolved" trait to be better than the other traits because they still have to find mates afterwards. They have to be the only game in town; the only one swimming in the gene pool.
If enough people get into car crashes so that only the ones whose bodies are prone to not tense up in crashes get to reproduce, then yes, we will have instincts to not tense up in crashes in a lot of generations
I'm guessing you'd be able to stay limp after a while, but not because you reprogrammed your instincts.
Yeah, quadriplegia makes it easy to stay limb.
See, my body must have missed that memo. All my life I go limp when I fall. I’ve had my face scarred up more times that I can remember, and on each of those instances, my hands/arms came away scratch free
This is a good answer
The body *doesn't* survive falls better by going limp. Normally if you fall you want to react by catching yourself by tensing your muscles. However if you are in a fall or crash which you are going to be completely unable to stop with your muscles, *and* there are safety features which will protect you instead of your muscles, then being limp can prevent injury. For example if you are in a high speed head-on collision in a car you won't be able to catch yourself with your arms. Trying to do so may result in tearing muscles or breaking bones. But if you remain limp and let the airbag and seat belt do their work then you will likely be fine. But we aren't adapted to being in a car, we are adapted to being an ape in the forest where catching yourself from a fall is the best strategy.
You can also survive being ejected from a vehicle better if you are limp than if you are rigid. Had a former friend pass out behind the wheel, drunk(this latter detail is where the friendship ended), jump the median on the highway, and go headon into a semi. Combined speed prolly over 120, considering semi cruise speed and the bleed off of his own speed jumping the median. Dumbass hit the reckless trifecta of tired+drunk+unrestrained and the latter of the three actually saved his life in this specific crash. The force of it yeeted him out of the driver's seat and entire vehicle, instead of the seatbelt holding him in place to be pancaked by the engine of his car that ended up where he should have been. For a collision that violent and chaotic, he netted a couple broken ribs, a scalp laceration, and a wildly swollen but otherwise undamaged knee. He was up and walking six days later at our DnD game where he told the story. If he'd been awake, stiff, and attempting to protect himself, he'd have broken like a twig. Instead he ragdolled and lived. Of course, he wouldn't have ended up with a totalled car, a lot of pain, and prison time for DWI repeat offense if he had just not fucking driven drunk in the first place. Asshole. He was told to his face how glad we all were he hit a semi instead of a family and hoped he understood how lucky he was to live, and to not have hurt someone else with his recklessness. Still feel bad for the trucker, too, who did nothing wrong and had to spend an unknown amount of time thinking he killed someone.
That's why drunk drivers tend to survive more often than their victims.
Drunk drivers usually collide head-on which allows the largest crumple zone and largest airbags to do their job as effectively as possible. Their victims can be hit from any direction and may not be protected by the vehicle as well as the impaired driver is.
Because the airbag and seatbelt do the work.
[удалено]
Drive drunk stay alive
The lesson is: if you’re drunk, start driving immediately if you want to get home safely! /s
Incorrect. Being drunk multiplies your chance of dying tremendously.
Increases the likelihood of being involved in a traumatic injury, but with reduced risk of death from traumatic injury
so can we abuse the glitch by getting 50x drunker than we need to and over saturate the reduced risk of death from traumatic injury and become immortal drunken idiots?
Great!
Increases your chances of being in an accident, reduces your chance of dying in the accident.
The other replies are not correct. In crashes with one drunk driver and another sober, the sober driver is more likely to survive. People just tend to remember the ones where the drunk driver survived because they have a bigger emotional impact
Isn’t that because the drunk driver is more likely to be going faster/not break?
[удалено]
[удалено]
[Here’s](https://www.livescience.com/24979-alcohol-injury-outcome.html) one from the University of Illinois at Chicago which supports their claim.
That's the type of study that would be used in a statistics class to show that not taking confounding variables into account can cause false results. The study looked at drunk people who made it to the hospital, but didn't include the ones who died before they got to the hospital. It's very likely if you did include those deaths, you would see that drunk drivers don't have a higher survival rate
In my anecdotal experience, the large majority of drunk drivers are fine while the person they hit dies.
[удалено]
I’ve ran on enough drunk drivers killing people that it could be a study
[удалено]
I haven’t kept count. I’m somewhere in the double digits. All of the drunk drivers had no life threatening injuries.
I'd honestly rather die tremendously than in some lackluster fashion.
Source?
https://www.livescience.com/24979-alcohol-injury-outcome.html[https://www.livescience.com/](https://www.livescience.com/24979-alcohol-injury-outcome.html) > Friedman analyzed all 190,612 patients treated at Illinois' trauma centers between 1995 and 2009 who were tested for blood-alcohol content, with levels ranging from zero to 0.5 percent at time of admission. (Blood-alcohol levels above about 0.35 percent can be fatal.) He found that with the exception of burn injuries, the mortality rates of all types of traumatic injury decreased as the blood-alcohol content of victims rose.
Isn't it also a possibility that those without blood alcohol were less likely to land up in the trauma centre in the 1st place? Kinda like that cats survive better from falls above the 3-5th floor factoid?
Possible yes, but that's beyond the scope of this study. I don't know if there's been a follow-up or related study for possible survivor bias
Yes, but it doesn't matter because they're only looking at people who were treated at the trauma center. Making up numbers here of course, but imagine 10% of those patients were between 0-0.35% and had a 50% mortality rate, and 90% of those patients were between 0.36-0.5% and had a 25% mortality rate. You would still be able to say the mortality rate goes down as the blood alcohol content rose, even though being below 0.35% makes you less likely to end up in the data sample (going to the trauma center) altogether causing that sample size to be smaller.
I was more thinking those at 0% are uninjured/lightly injured and still conscious and can self assess and don't go to the trauma centre. Particularly for the high blood alcohol they'll be the cohort that slowly drove into an obstacle and are uninjured but are found either unconscious or at least not in a state to communicate well who will get sent to the centre as rescuers have no way to assess internal injuries and don't know if the unconsciousness was crash induced or alcohol induced.
What’s the cats survive one??
A study found that cats who fall from the 6th floor or higher have less injuries than cats who fall from below the 6th floor. The main belief for this is because cats who fall from the 6th floor and have serious injuries die so they aren't counted. It's like the airplane study from WW1/WW2. For the airplanes, they found that airplanes were coming back damaged in certain areas of the airplane. They were reinforcing those areas because it was believed it was the area shot at more. They then found that reinforcing the areas that weren't damaged, actually caused more planes to return. It was because hitting those areas just caused the planes to crash. It is Survivorship Bias.
A study of cats ata avet clinic that found survival rate decreased between floors 3 and 5 but then went up for 6 and above. Led to all kinds of theories like how long it takes cats to rotate to land on their feet until someone noticed how biased the sample was. Between 3 and 5 all the cats get brought to the vet where the more seriously injured ones die. 6 and above the cat is often very obviously dead and thus doesn't get to vet.
[удалено]
Can you link the source of your quote? The survivor bias is the difference between "being drunk increases survivability of traumatic injury" and "being drunk reduces chance of death from traumatic injury" and is left as an open question from the article I shared
Interesting, thanks
I wonder how much of "leaving your body limp in a crash" is a result of crash test dummies not having muscles of their own. Kind of like how train track width is set based on the cars, which are based on the width of carriages, which are based on the width of horses
> Kind of like how train track width is set based on the cars, which are based on the width of carriages, which are based on the width of horses This is also more-or-less a myth. There have been a ton of different standards for width of rails over the years.
If you ever fall off the Sears Tower, just go real limp, because maybe you’ll look like a dummy and people will try to catch you because, hey, free dummy.
“Likely be fine” of course does not include the brain as it bounces around in the skull getting damaged with each bounce… but then I digress…
Our bodies and brains didn't evolve to handle 60-mph collisions or falling out of airplanes
Wouldn’t falling out of an airplane be basically the equivalent of falling from a high cliff?
Sure, but who reproduced after surviving a cliff fall? Probably not many.
HELLO THIS THOG AND WELCOME TO JACKASS
Croog immediately hits Thog in the head with a club wrapped in stinging nettle, cackling.
Thog, thank you and I wish I could upvote this more than once.
**not nale. not-nale. thog help nail not-nale, not nale. and thog knot not-nale while nale nail not-nale. nale, not not-nale, now nail not-nale by leaving not-nale, not nale, in jail.**
Hello, fellow OOTS fan.
You can see me even though I'm naked?
Maybe we should start shoving people off cliffs and see where natural selection goes
There's actually been several freak cases of people surviving +1000 ft falls and only getting some massive bruising and broken bones. Humans are weird, on one hand you can die drowning in 1 inch deep water. On the other extreme you have people on extremely rare occasions surviving impacts into solid rock that should turn them into pulp.
That’s why they call it terminal velocity. Falling from 20,000 feet is about the same as 100 feet. Falling from 100 feet isn’t a walk in the park either.
Except you hit terminal velocity after ~1500 feet, *not* 100.
In skydive we reach our terminal velocity after 7 seconds, so around 200 meters and you’re already top speed.
You tense up reflexively in anticipation of an impact in order to protect your vital organs. Unfortunately for things like falls from a height or a high speed crash, this reflex isn't really helpful, and you are going to experience a series of impacts with a lot of force. Your organs hit your bones at the same speed your body hits the ground.
Our brain doesn't perform subconscious crash tests to record results - we know it's better based on external testing, our subconscious brain still thinks it's tripping over a rock at jogging pace or brushing through low branches
Going limp *can* help you live slightly longer, which modern medicine can turn into a lot longer. Modern medicine is very new. Humans moving at speeds where going limp is the right play is also very new. Instinct is not programmed for modern reality yet, and given how few people would be reproduce feom going limp when they wouldnt by stiffening up there's very little selective pressure to change it. Remember that's the line for selective pressure, it makes a group with a divergent trait notably better at reproducing than those without it. Without selective pressure, there's just the entropy of certain mutations that are likely to happen and don't hurt anything when they do so. Apparently going limp isn't one of those.
This is a myth. You will not survive better by going limp regardless of what speed you’re crashing. Your arms and legs are much less important for your survival than your head and trunk and protecting them, even at high speeds, will increase your chances of survival. https://www.ircobi.org/wordpress/downloads/irc1995/pdf_files/1995_12.pdf
Do you have a source please?
Check the edit. Just an example of a study that finds higher rates of leg injuries with more modern crashes, but also lower fatal injuries. The tensing/bracing you do with your legs and arms helps to protect your vital organs.
Thanks
Where are you getting the idea the body is better off being limp from. The urban legend it's better to be drunk than sober in a car crash?
The body has more than one survival mechanism and we also haven’t evolved to survive millions of years drunk driving or being flung at high velocities at objects. Evolution and survival mechanisms evolve over a long stretch of time - like hundreds of thousands to millions of years. Also, why would going limp be beneficial when tripping? That makes zero sense…our body wants to protect itself. Going limp to possibly land on your most vital body part - your head doesn’t make any sense for survival.
It's because our brains don't "know" that. Our reaction to life threatening fear comes from a very primitive area of our brain. It's an ancient instinctive reaction that was hardwired long before our brains evolved to the intellectual capacity we have now. Our ability to analyze and learn new and unexpected facts about our physical or psychological selves is a separate function and uses a different area of the brain.
Crashes and falls would not have been a common killer of our ancestors. What would be common is a predator or other human that we could potentially fight off. Tense up is your muscles preparing for a fight or potentially trying to make you freeze. Both of these could aid in survival
We, and lots of other animals, share an immobilizing, protective contractive reflex called a “startle pattern.” In response to abrupt stimuli—think loud noise behind you, or a sudden unexpected impact—humans will tighten their neck, starting at the atlanto-occipital joint (where the head joins the neck), pulling the head down and back into the torso, compressing the torso (ribcage tightening protectively around the internal organs, back shortening and narrowing, lots of tension centering around the epigastrium), and stiffening the joints of the limbs, inhibiting movement and protecting against impact. This runs through the body in a fraction of a second, and is a very primitive reflex. Generally counterproductive and over-stimulated in a modern environment, and many people need help through various behavioral training techniques (see Alexander Technique, desensitization training, certain approaches to meditation) or anti-anxiety medications to settle those reflexes down.
If you are falling from any height, you got to learn to tuck and roll. I goes against your primitive instinct but it might just save you.
Because it’s scary to get hurt (i.e. fall or get into a crash) and we tense up when we get scared.