If you are a track and field fan, as I am, you know that Jamaican sprinter Usain Bolt is the fastest human being on earth.  Some say that the man can really fly!

The three-time Olympic gold medalist personally holds the world records in the 100 and 200 meter dashes.  His speedy accomplishments have spawned a knock-off commercial for a well known communication provider that depicts a sprinter texting while running out ahead of his competition.  In the end, the sprinter, despite texting and running at the same time, wins the race without ever running out of his lane.

If only it were that easy in real life when driving.

The safety problem associated with texting while driving is big news in today’s world.  States as well as the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration are quickly enacting laws to ban the use of cell phones and restrict any type of texting while driving.  Safety advocates are coming out of their seats to reiterate what many studies have revealed – that the combination of texting and driving is profoundly dangerous.

A recent study conducted by the Virginia Tech Transportation Institute using long-haul truck drivers concluded that when drivers texted while driving, their collision risk was 23 times greater than when not texting.  Though the study did not include passenger vehicles, researchers agree that the findings apply to all drivers.

It’s hard not to agree that the two behaviors are incompatible bedfellows, but very few people have looked at the science behind the issue – which presents a very interesting story.

There are three basic types of distractions: visual, manual and cognitive.  While all driving distractions have some degree of risk, texting is the most dangerous because it involves all three types of distractions.  Drivers who text while driving are guilty of taking their eyes off the road, at least one hand off of the steering wheel, and their focus off of driving.

Research shows that drivers take their eyes off the road for an average of 4.6 seconds out of every 6 seconds while texting.  At 55 miles per hour, texting drivers will travel the length of a football field, including the end zones, without looking at the road!

If you are bird in flight, you may be able to get away with this risk, since millions of years of evolution have given birds the sharp visual acuity to recognize and react to objects at high speed.  But man was not meant to fly.  Physiologically, man was designed to travel on two legs. Even Usain Bolt, when setting the world speed record, was clocked at a mere 27 miles per hour.  Hardly the requisite speed for flight.

Not all of us can run as fast as Usain.  The average top running speed for most of us is about 14 miles per hour.  When we get behind the wheel of a car, we experience some of the same sensations of flying such as speed and centrifugal force.  But as we begin to move at speeds greater that what we are built to adapt to, it becomes more difficult to react in time to increasing speeds.

Herein lays one of the scientific rubs.  A little phenomenon referred to as the flicker fusion factor separates man from birds when it comes to reaction times and speed.

The flicker fusion factor is a concept in the psychophysics of vision.  It is defined as the frequency at which an intermittent light beam appears to be completely steady to the observer.  Humans have a flicker fusion frequency of 60 cycles per second.  Birds have a much greater frequency allowing them to fly and navigate a forest of trees while chasing their prey at high speeds without the benefit of speed limits, traffic signals, and lane restrictions.

Unlike our eyes, which make up 1% of the total weight of our heads, the eyes of a bird are the largest organ in size relative to their bodies of all animals.  Birds also rely on a much greater peripheral vision than we as humans have, truly providing a bird’s eye view.

If you aren’t feeling totally inferior just yet, a white paper from the National Safety Council illustrates that the human brain cannot multitask.  Our brain can juggle tasks very rapidly, but it can only perform one task at a time.  A person who is texting while driving is overloading their brain requiring divided attention.

As motorists, the faster we drive above our 14 miles per hour speed limit, the more we are incapable of escaping our own physiological limitations that separate ourselves from our high-flying friends.  Add in the extra distraction of texting while driving to a single-tasking brain, and you have a potential deadly mix that is beyond our physical control.

If you are still not convinced, try remembering the last time that you witnessed a bird crashing into a tree!

In the end, it is nothing to be ashamed of.  After all, we are only human.

A day does not go by in Washington without legislation intended to fix one problem ultimately affecting a host of other issues. It’s the principle of unintended consequences, and a fact of life in our complex world where everything has become so interconnected. Nowhere is this more evident than the transportation industry, which touches our economy, our environment and our infrastructure in virtually innumerable ways. It’s like the lyric from the popular children’s song that says “The knee bone’s connected to the thigh bone ...” Trucking, it seems, is connected to everything.

One example of how one issue can have a ripple effect on many others is truck productivity. The crux of the issue is truck size and weight, a debate that’s been raging for years in Washington and throughout the transportation sector. Recent forecasts estimate that freight volumes will increase nearly 28 percent by 2018, a growth curve that — absent any change in current size and weight restrictions — will require several million more trucks on America’s highways to meet demand. “More jobs, now that’s great!” you might think … until you consider the interconnected, unintended consequences: more traffic congestion and lost productivity. Increased fuel consumption and higher carbon emissions. The effect of more trucks putting more miles on a highway infrastructure already strained to the breaking point. The knee bone’s connected to the thigh bone ...

Many in the industry think the solution is clear: improve truck productivity. And there is a precedent — our counterparts in Europe, Canada and Australia have already done that and are reaping significant benefits. There’s plenty of research to support it. A 2008 American Transportation Research Institute study found that aligning our truck size and weight with the higher international standards would lead to great gains in productivity, as well as reductions in carbon emissions and a better shot at competing effectively in the global marketplace. The American Trucking Associations (ATA) has produced a list of recommendations — including raising the allowable weight of six-axle vehicles to 97,000 pounds and permitting 33-foot trailer combinations in certain states, and expanding the use of triple trailers where it is safe and practical to do so. We hope Congress will seriously consider them. With the projected rise in freight volumes, maximizing the efficiency of our transportation infrastructure has never been more important.

One state that may prove to be a good test bed is Maine. The Fiscal Year 2010 Transportation Appropriations bill recently signed into law by President Obama includes a provision to create a one-year pilot project to study the effects of eliminating the 80,000-pound vehicle weight limit on Maine’s federal highways. Allowing heavier trucks for a year will give researchers a chance to assess the impact on the much-debated areas of safety, commerce and road wear and tear.

It will be interesting to see how this experiment will educate the debate and, ultimately, the policy decisions which result. If the experience of our international colleagues is any guide, the consequences of more productive trucks will bring measurable benefits — for highway safety, the economy, our environment, congestion, business efficiency, energy policy and many other issues. The knee bone is connected to the thigh bone ...