Unintended Acceleration Risk Lower Than Everyday Driving Risk

David C. Holzman
by David C. Holzman

Your risk of dying from your Toyota’s unintended acceleration (UA) is so low as to be all but nil next to the more general risk of dying in an automobile, according to an “Opinionator” column in the New York Times, by journalist Robert Wright.


Wright calculates that your chance of dying from unintended acceleration in a Toyota is 2.8 in a million. Meanwhile, the average American’s chance of dying in a car accident over the next to years is one in 5,244, writes Wright. “So driving one of these suspect Toyotas raises your chances of dying in a car crash over the next two years from .01907 percent (that’s 19 one-thousandths of one percent, when rounded off) to .01935 percent (also 19 one-thousandths of one percent). (Methodology described in the article.)


Wright, who drives an ’05 Highlander, notes his suspicion that software is to blame for the UAs, and that he doesn’t particularly like the feel of electronic throttle control. But in examining the costs and benefits of cars that increasingly drive themselves, he says that even if electronic throttle control causes a few lives to be lost through unintended acceleration, it saves gasoline, reducing air pollution and global warming, and therein, saving some lives. Furthermore, the dollars saved can be spent to boost human welfare.


The thing that worries Wright is not the unintended acceleration, but irrational response to risk, such as that of terrorist attack, which can lead people to make mistakes, such as invading Iraq. “So go out and buy a Toyota,” he concludes. “It’s the patriotic thing to do.”

David C. Holzman
David C. Holzman

I'm a freelance journalist covering science, medicine, and automobiles.

More by David C. Holzman

Comments
Join the conversation
6 of 23 comments
  • Z71_Silvy Z71_Silvy on Mar 14, 2010

    Further proof that the media has taken a non-issue (unintended acceleration), singled out a manufacturer (Toyota) and has done considerable damage to them...for no reason.

  • Forraymond Forraymond on Mar 14, 2010

    I totally agree, the NYT is just a left wing radical rag. I get all my facts and all my opinions and all my talking points from Fox News.

  • JohnAZ JohnAZ on Mar 15, 2010

    The Toyota mess is not about the risk their cars provide to an individual. The story is about how Toyota handled news about the defects. They did everything in their power to bury the news and avoid expense and loss of reputation. It may be appropriate for the NYT to suggest there is little risk with your Toyota, but it is not appropriate to suggest that the Toyota company is not a risk to America. Just like Global Warming and Climategate, the NYT wouldn't recognize the real issue of the Toyota story unless they were paid to. God bless Fox News, Glenn Beck, the Tea Party, and the 912 Project. There is hope that we will all survive the NYT, the MSM, unfair competition, and Obama.

    • See 1 previous
    • Tricky Dicky Tricky Dicky on Mar 15, 2010

      JohnAZ - I spend most of my waking hours trying to work out what the strategies are for car companies. I just don't know how you can assert so strongly that Big-T "did everything in their power to bury the news and avoid expense and loss of reputation". It's a libellous kind of statement to make. Burying safety information is far from proven (as long as you know not to accept hysterical, fear-whipping, self-serving media). I mean, really analyze the situation: What could have been done differently? Could that only be done with the benefit of hindsight? Did they deviate from their famously stable processes? Where are the people on the inside raising their voices to 'tell-it-like-it is'? Come on if this was such a well-founded attempt at burying facts about corporate evil-doing, someone's going to crawl out of the woodwork to spill the beans. Sure there's that crazy ex-lawyer dude, but the courts have seen the rubbish documents that he stole and have said there's nothing doing - he just trying to screw cash out of them. All in all, I don't see how you can confidently say those kinds of things that are frankly libellous.

  • 210delray 210delray on Mar 15, 2010

    I bet that didn't hold up posts in the Farago era. Hmm, I posted this AFTER I saw psar's comment.

Next