The
Drug Influence Evaluation is
a medical test made up by traffic policemen.
DIE tests are administered by police who call
themselves Drug Recognition Experts.
A DRE
officer stops a driver, and suspects drugs.
The DRE examines the driver, looking for
supposed physical "indicators" of
the presence of various drugs. The officer concludes
that the driver is impaired by a drug, orders
forced blood testing, and—before the
results come back— predicts the presence
of a drug belonging to a particular drug category.
Then,
when the blood test does come back showing that
drug, the officer's amazing prediction is taken
as proof that the driver must have been
impaired by that drug. How else could the
officer have made that amazing prediction? [Here's how.]
Some
drivers refuse blood testing. When these people
are prosecuted, DRE officers' opinions are used,
without toxicology testing, as evidence of drug
impaired driving.
How traffic-police think DIEs work
Drugs
cause physical effects. Traffic police have convinced
themselves they can puzzle cause and effect backward,
from physical effects to impairing drug(s).
Traffic police believe they
have proof DIEs work. First, in day to day use the DIE
appears to validate itself. Drug Recognition Experts
predict specific drugs, and later laboratory
testing finds exactly those drugs! Amazing.
Second, police cite
"scientific studies" that claim to prove
DIEs are accurate. Later
you'll learn what peer-reviewed science says about the
validity of those studies.

Does any of this seem odd to you?
A
highly accurate scientific test was made up
by two policemen (wonderful people, but
not scientists), who did no scientific evaluation
to see whether their homemade test actually
worked.
When
the federal agency that promotes these tests
finally got around to field testing the tests,
the "validation study" they issued
turns out to have been written by an agency
employee [LAPD 173]. The employee who works
for the agency that promotes the tests reported
that the tests the agency promotes are... 94%
accurate! NHTSA published its employee's
report in-house, without allowing independent
outside experts to check for gross scientific
errors and exaggerations.
Key elements of the traffic-police DIE are unstandardized,
which means no one can tell you —or DRE
trainees!— how the test is done.
But the test is still highly accurate. The
traffic-police DIE is highly accurate no
matter how it's done!
Medical
boards and state governments certify medical doctors to
diagnose drug impairment after
7 to 10 years of medical training.
Traffic police certify other traffic police to diagnose
medical drug impairment after 7 days
of police training.
Is this story
possible? No, it isn't. The traffic-police Drug
Influence Evaluation story can't be true. Here
at DECP.US I'm gonna splain to you why and how
it isn't true.
Good people, bad science
Nothing
here
at DECP.US suggests police are liars or NHTSA's DIE validation
contractors are cheats. Police are honest and honorable.
We're talking about guys who run toward the sound
of gunfire; they are better men than me. The lady police
are better men than me. But they are not scientists.
The
fine folks at NHTSA and the IACP are good people doing
their best. But mostly they are not scientists.
Science
is harder than it looks. Validating diagnostic
tests is harder than it looks. Validation methods
based on common sense lead immediately to immense
over estimations of test accuracy in a way that
is entirely invisible to non-specialists. NHTSA's
in-house traffic-police DIE validation science
looks like real science. But it's not. DIEs are
crackpot science, not because someone is cheating,
but because they were invented and tested by wonderful
people who lacked the specialized training necessary
to know the subtle tricks required to validate
a diagnostic test in a scientifically meaningful
way.
DECP.US is not about these good people, it's about that
bad science.
|