Today on CNN Newsroom

The latest news and information from around the world. Also connect with CNN through social media. We want to hear from you.
July 29th, 2009
10:52 AM ET

Texting Increases Crash Risk More Than 20 Times

A new study shows texting while driving may be even more dangerous than you think. CNN’s Josh Levs explains.


Filed under: Josh Levs
soundoff (11 Responses)
  1. Ryan Harris

    ha well i can text with out looking so im good i dont look away get to know your phone and be safe

    July 29, 2009 at 10:56 am |
  2. John

    These are astonishing numbers. What people don't notice is that it is not merely while driving that you fail to see anything when texting, it is also in life. Texting takes your attention from seeing your life.
    In Inhibiting reflection: http://www.pandalous.com/topic/inhibiting_reflection it is described how cell phones and texting, among others, blind you not only to other cars, but to life itself. They should do a study of how many life accidents happen because of texting.

    July 29, 2009 at 11:33 am |
  3. Ryan

    who to cause the war in Iraq Mrs Starr you talk the strss of our troops

    July 29, 2009 at 2:17 pm |
  4. mike roach

    i am so upset with the media im a truck driver and the clip i seen earlier of a crash due to texting was a little tiny commuter van. that my friends is not a truck because the one i drive has 18 wheels and can gross up to 80,000 pounds and its not just us texting or calling ect. its the general public so why when this issue comes up it points to the truck driver im so tired of us getting the blame were always under the gun were expected to drive our vehicles and know what john q public is gonna do at the same time so hey take it easy on us without trucks or truckers america stops

    July 29, 2009 at 3:52 pm |
  5. Charlie Erickson

    Texting while driving needs to not only be banned, but serious consequences need to be implemented for violation of the ban. Just because one can text without looking away from the road, one's attention is taken away, to mentally compose and transfer the message from brain to hand. So although you are still looking at the road, you are barely aware of what's actually happening. Though your body is making all the moves to permit the driving of the vehicle, your mind is elsewhere, which could be fatal in a situation which would require you to make a quick decision and reaction.

    By the way, wasn't the telephone invented to do away with texting (as in the telegraph)? So, what's with the regression? I can only see texting as being of value, in an important or emergency situation where sending a message while being on the periphery of signal range, will make a difference. I'm not referring to the phone unit being used in it's internet mode, by the way, which shouldn't be used while driving either.

    Charlie.

    July 29, 2009 at 4:39 pm |
  6. Larry

    This is news? I can't believe people would even think about texting while driving.

    July 30, 2009 at 3:26 am |
  7. Ronnie Braun

    What I haven't seen discussed is when health care reform will actually be effective if passed?

    August 15, 2009 at 4:17 pm |
  8. Beth_Albany_Oregon

    Josh,
    Thank you for your coverage of the "truth" on healthcare and all the other jobs you have 🙂

    My question: Is there any provisions in the healthcare reform bill addressing mental health "Parity?" This is very important because many physical/medical problems/issues can be the direct result of certian mental health diagnosis.

    This would ecspecially be true for dx of depression and those who have suffered severe childhood truama.

    Additionally, alcohol and drug addiction are a very big drain on the healthcare system in so many ways. So is their provisions for this and if there is how comprehensive is this coverage.

    Ask anyone in the medical or mental health field and they would agree that good ",mental health" is a big factor in people being healthier!

    Thanks

    August 15, 2009 at 4:23 pm |
  9. Seba Krumholtz

    will major tort reform be a "deal breaker" for the new health reform package?
    how will the 47 million new patients into the health care system get primary care with primary care physicians already "maxed out" and over-burdened?
    Is Obama's plan willing to use nurses, nurse-practitioners and physician assistants instead of primary care doctors?
    does Congress realize that the AMA represents a small percentage of all the physicians in this country?
    if tax payers are helping to pay for "the right to receive health care" for the 47 million then why doesn't the taxpayer have the right to ban or place a tax on cigarettes, sodas, fast food, etc.?

    August 15, 2009 at 4:27 pm |
  10. Catherine Hurcomb

    By taxing households with incomes over $250,000 they would be simply paying THEIR portion of Social Security they are now exempt from as the cap is around $100K. Actually they would be paying Less then everyone earning less than $100k. The current rate is over 6% almost 7% and the proposed tax increase is only 5.4%.

    Catherine

    August 15, 2009 at 5:54 pm |
  11. ESTEBAN SOLIS

    JOSH, I LOVE YOUR REPORTING. KEEP UP THE GOOD WORK. WHILE EVERYBODY QUESTIONS AND TALKS YOU GIVE THE ACCURATE INFORMATION WE NEED. I AM GOING TO BED BUT WILL WAKE UP EARLY AND READ ALL THESE REPORTS. i TOO WISH YOU WERE WITH ALI VELSHI ON THE ROAD.

    August 16, 2009 at 5:29 am |