The MedicalXpress article correctly flags driving's demands on the thalamus, premotor cortex, and extrastriate areas yet underplays the dose-response curve documented in peer-reviewed work. A 2014 meta-analysis of 12 fMRI studies (total n=187, all observational, no RCTs) confirmed sustained vigilance recruits these hubs but omitted real-world variance from sleep debt. Australian Transport Safety Bureau data, drawn from police reports rather than controlled trials, peg fatigue at 20-30% of crashes; this observational sample of thousands lacks biomarker confirmation and may undercount microsleeps. Adding NHTSA's U.S. analysis of 100,000 annual drowsy-driving crashes (mostly observational crash databases) reveals a consistent pattern: risk doubles after 17 hours awake, matching laboratory sleep-restriction protocols with n=50-100 participants. What the source misses is regulatory asymmetry—Australia's two-hour break guideline lacks the enforcement teeth of EU tachograph rules—and emerging evidence that semi-automated systems induce complacency, increasing fatigue onset by 15-20% in simulator trials (n=40, within-subjects design). Stress and newborn parenting, briefly noted, interact with circadian misalignment; a 2022 cohort study (n=1,200 shift workers) linked <5 hours sleep to 2.1-fold crash odds, free of industry funding. Driver experience offers no shield, as veteran cohorts still show performance decay after 90 minutes on monotonous roads. Public-health messaging should therefore prioritize objective monitoring over subjective alertness.