Baby seats - FAO Mark (RLBS)

Honest John Back Room » Motoring discussion
View Threaded
Tue 18 Feb 2003 11:30
Baby seats - FAO Mark (RLBS) - Ian (Cape Town)
M,
following on from our previous discussion re-Camilla, which has sunk to the murky depths of the Tech forum, this pitched up today ... You'll just have to keep grinning at her in the mirror!
(BTW, junior - 8 mths - has decided he likes the motoring thing. However, he gets really riled if the car stops at lights etc... and starts shouting and carrying on until we start moving again!)

Safety fears for kids

American safety regulators are concerned that more children are sitting in the front of cars, where they are at greater risk during an accident.
According to Reuters, the US government released a new survey that found that about 30 per cent of children aged between four and seven were sitting in the front seat. The survey also said that 15 per cent of infants and 10 per cent of toddlers aged between one and three were being placed in the front seat.

The safety inspectors conducting the poll observed 3 500 children in passenger vehicles, while monitoring motor safety habits at 1 100 intersections in the country.

"Youngsters are at greater risk of severe injury or death when they're involved in a crash while riding in the front seat," Dr Jeffrey Runge, administrator of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, said at a news conference this week.

"It is vitally important that all parents secure their children in the back seat. The back is always the safest place for kids to ride."

Safety regulators advised that placing children in the back seat could reduce the risk of serious injury or death during an accident by nearly 40 per cent.

Children in the front seat are also at risk of injury caused by the force of the inflating passenger airbag.
Reply | Report as offensive | Link
Tue 18 Feb 2003 14:40
Baby seats - FAO Mark (RLBS) - Mark (RLBS)
Well, its not actually very clear.

Statistically, from best to worst, the safety of the seats is back middle, back left, back right, front left, front right.

Although I guess that is probably reversed in a acountry which drives on the other side.

However, that is not taking into account whether or not someone is sitting in a child seat or not.

Also the Americans are pretty horrible in their treatment of statistics. For example, they are quite prepared to say something increases your chance of being hurt by 40% when they mean is that it moves your chances of being hurt from 1:10,000,000 to 1:6,000,000

In addition, they rarely take into account contributing factors. e.g. it may be that a child is 40% more likely to be hurt in an accident if he is in the front rather than the back. However, it is equally possible that the child is 60% more likely to even be in an accident because of parental distracion if he is sat in the back.

In other words, I never believe any US scientific report befor eit is confirmed by someone else.

However, Camilla is still in the back and going to stay there I think. But I still have my doubts that her risk in the front is any higher than an adults.
Reply | Report as offensive | Link

We give you the low down on how to save on insurance, little-known tricks and tips, what insurance groups mean and how to use insurance aggregators to beat insurers.

Insurance group finder and how to save on insurance

From which small car to buy at which price point to the best UK-built cars, our Top 10s have the lot. Click now for your shortlist.

Unsure of what to buy? Our Top 10s are here to help you....