Eye Problems Archives

In Defense of Older Drivers

In Defense of Older Drivers

Having practiced Optometry for over 30 years by the early 90s, I realized my state's visual requirements for any driver were sadly lacking, even though they were consistent with almost all of the other states. They all rely way to heavily on visual acuity, i.e., 20/20. 20/40, 20/60, etc.

I set out to design a measuring method that would record all of the things necessary to be a capable driver. I had one of my local auto salvage dealers cut the driver's portion out of a junked car. I cleaned it up, built a small "engine" and "hood" area if front of the dash board to contain wiring switches, etc and hooked them up to a computer, and had a computer programmer design the program I needed.

I am going to explain all the things I measured and tested and you will be surprised at what I learned.

To get a norm of the youngest and fastest, so to speak I ran fifty 16 to 25 year olds through the procedure and then put several hundred 70+ year olds through the system to see how they would compare with the "kids". The oldest person in my sample was 95.

The first thing I observed on a test subject was joint freedom:

Were they able to rotate their head?

Did they have free and easy wrist, elbow, and upper arm (shoulder joint) movement?

Could they rotate their feet at the ankles?

Could they also point their feet up and down?

Could they swing their lower leg back and forth at the knee?

And, finally, where they able to rotate their leg at the hip joint?

Then I tested their hearing with a standard hearing test instrument. More important I tested their ability to tell me which direction the sound was coming from--behind them on the left, right, directly behind them, directly in front of them or on the left or on the right, or was the sound coming from directly beside them.

As far as vision was concerned I measured their acuity (20/20 to 20/200) with and without glasses. And I measured their peripheral visual field in degrees plus their stereopsis (depth perception) at 20 ft.

Now I was ready to put them in my test "car."

Steering reaction time to the right and to the left was recorded in response to lights in front of them, to the side of them, and to sound (small horn or buzzer).

Braking reaction time was recorded, i.e., moving foot from accelerator to brake pedal to all of the above stimuli.

Finally, I measured their comprehension. This was a timed event. The instruction to them was if they saw a red light in front of them or heard the horn they were to hit the brake. If they saw a light flash on their right they were to turn the steering wheel to the left. If they saw a light flash on the left they were to turn the steering wheel to the right.

I gave them a test run through all of the above by running through three randomly time spaced and randomly selected stimuli. We then measured the time taken to do all the above five times. The program would not go to the next stimulus untill the correct action was taken.

Here is what I learned:

There are three things that are extremely important in safe driving ability. I will list them in order of importance, though all three are very close in their significance.

Number 1: Peripheral Vision of at least 160 degrees.

Number 2: Joint Freedom

Number 3: Comprehension.

Every other problem with the exception of really poor acuity (20/400) can be compensated for, mostly by just being aware the problem exists.

About the visual acuity exception: A three dimensional object like a ball or a small animal moving in the street is infinitely easier to see than two dimensional letters. Our legal definition of 20/200 acuity as being legally blind is a terrible disservice to those so classified as well as the taxpayers. These people can easily drive safely in the daylight hours.

I proved this to a professional driving school owner by hiring him and his dual-controlled car and reducing my acuity with high plus lenses to 20/200, 20/400 and 20/600. Then I reduced his acuity to those levels with lenses and he drove and I was the safety observer. Neither of us became non-drivers until we hit the 20/600 level. Then with our normal good visual acuity we each restricted our peripheral visual field and we both agreed that any reduction of your peripheral vision is very dangerous. This by the way is something very few states, if any require to be measured.

I also learned that the "car" and computer program I originally thought I could build and sell, while neat as all get out, was unnecessary.

Anyone can check their own peripheral vision by looking straight ahead at a small fixed object, stick your thumbs in your ears, and with your fingers pointed forward, wiggle them. If you can't see the movement, you are becoming a dangerous driver, especially at slow speeds. At higher speeds anything that happened on your side, you'd be past it before it presented a danger.

Obviously it is easy to check your own joint freedom just by doing the above mentioned movements. And be aware of where you have a problem if you do. Comprehension can be checked with that simple child's toy called "Simon Says." You should be able to repeat at least four and preferably five of its light sequences.

And here is a shocker folks: REACTION TIME, does NOT diminish with aging. The only time I found a problem with reaction time was when joint freedom was an issue or comprehension was lacking. The 95 year old geezer I put through my program was faster than half the young group. The slowest reaction time I found was on a 22 year old female who absolutely refused to take any action until she thought about it.

My local paper, the Wichita Eagle, brought a 78 year old female to me to test. After the test I told them I'd ride in the Indianapolis 500 with her. She admitted to having a lead foot. The reporters doing the story then went driving with her and reported that yes, she drove very fast, but was a safe driver.

I ultimately gave my "car" and system to Wichita State University for a tax deduction.

I do not know if they continued my study.

This article may be reproduced, anywhere, at anytime, for any reason by any person. The information contained needs to be widespread. Thank you.

Joe Phillips.

Follow Ups:

• Re: In Defense of Older Drivers Nina 10:04:30 7/21/03 (0)
• Re: In Defense of Older Drivers Archive in eyes. Walt Stoll 07:45:38 7/20/03 (0)
• Re: In Defense of Older Drivers Steve 16:36:04 7/19/03 (0)

In Reply to: In Defense of Older Drivers posted by Joseph C. Phillips, O.D. on July 19, 2003 at 15:01:08:

Joe, Good info..That why I work at staying flexible..Steve

In Reply to: In Defense of Older Drivers posted by Joseph C. Phillips, O.D. on July 19, 2003 at 15:01:08:

Thanks, Joe.

Wonderful information! Of course the laws will continue to follow the simplistic standards already in place.

Many of the ills of the world could be resolved by knowledge already known; if it just did not have to be filtered through the bureaucratic mind first.

My cynicism has been earned.

Namaste`

Walt

In Reply to: In Defense of Older Drivers posted by Joseph C. Phillips, O.D. on July 19, 2003 at 15:01:08:

Good article. I'd rather drive behind a "senior" driver anytime over a teenager and besides....senior drivers normally don't use road rage. Can't say the same about some irate, smart-___ teens.