This article is a great example of how correlation might be suggestive of causation, but is not itself causation.
Are pickup trucks inherently more dangerous than other vehicles? Or are pickup truck drivers more dangerous than other drivers? Or are pickup trucks more likely to be driving on more-dangerous roads than on less-dangerous roads?
Unfortunately I wasn't able to read the article due to the paywall, but I didn't see any mention of controlling for confounders in the abstract.
Rolling coal generally requires diesel engines (the smoke is from partially burned diesel). Gasoline is much easier to burn and I imagine it would be rather hard to modify a gasoline car to produce black smoke.
I advocate taking the lane in many situations but it's worth noting that you can be passed in your lane with less than 1 ft of space even if you're taking the lane.
Are there reasons to think that trucks are easier to drive safely? E.g. you might be able to see further (even if you can't see the child walking in front of you at the crosswalk). Seem to be plenty of reasons to think they are more dangerous, and that it would be surprising to find that they aren't.
Are pickup trucks inherently more dangerous than other vehicles? Or are pickup truck drivers more dangerous than other drivers? Or are pickup trucks more likely to be driving on more-dangerous roads than on less-dangerous roads?
Unfortunately I wasn't able to read the article due to the paywall, but I didn't see any mention of controlling for confounders in the abstract.