Honda Odyssey vs Dodge/Chrysler minivans

dustyk · February 2006

The effectiveness of ESC, much like ABS, is in dispute. The NHTSA's research so far has been extremely limited in scope, being based on 1997-2002 crash results in five states. I am not sure, but I believe the population of mini-vans in that study may have been zero. The ESC studies have concentrated on passenger cars and SUVs and during the time frame of those studies ESC was not widely available in mini-vans.

The specific claim on the level of ESC effectiveness in any vehicle type is speculation, much less mini-vans. Even the NHTSA recognizes that much of the data is post anaylsis that's used to evaluate the effectiveness of most motor vehicle safety equipment, and is usually subjective and highly inaccurate. That is why the NHTSA has proposed the Event Data Recorder (EDR) be installed in every vehicle made.

The fact is that since the inception of certain "safety" devices the highway fatality rate has risen,not dropped. We now know that the lap only seat belt actually killed people, and ABS may have contributed to increase injuries and fatalities in certain types of accidents. Like safety equipment in general, ABS and maybe ESC is not the safety panacea that advocates symptomatically rush about.

Dusty

rorr · February 2006

"The fact is that since the inception of certain "safety" devices the highway fatality rate has risen,not dropped."

Interesting statement. Fatality rates are at an all time low and have fallen every year for AT LEAST the last 10 years.

http://www-fars.nhtsa.dot.gov/

Fatality rate (fatalities/100 million vehicle miles):

1994 1.73
1995 1.73
1996 1.69
1997 1.64
1998 1.58
1999 1.55
2000 1.53
2001 1.51
2002 1.51
2003 1.48
2004 1.46

Fatality rate (fatalities/100,000 population) has seen a similar decline from 1994 (15.64) to 2004 (14.52). Fatality rate (fatalities/100,000 registered vehicles) is also down from 1994 (21.15) to 2003 (18.58). I've seen data in the past for years prior to 1994 but will have to dig for it. Generally (and with VERY few exceptions), the fatality rate has fallen virtually every year since the '60s.

I'd be interested to see the data showing a rise in fatality rates immediately following the inception of certain safety devices.

dustyk · February 2006

My mistake. My apologies.

Injuries and fatalities have increased on vehicles equipped with ABS:

"...the many statistical analysis of crash databases performed over the last several years suggest that, for automobiles, the introduction of four-wheel anti-lock brakes has produced net safety benefits much lower than originally expected. For example, Kahane found that while the involvement of ABS-equipped automobiles in fatal multi-vehicle crashes on wet roads was reduced by 24 percent, fatal single-vehicle crashes increased by 28 percent."

A Comprehensive Light Vehicle Antilock Brake System Test Track Performance Evaluation, Society of Automotive Engineers (1998) NHTSA #1999-01-1287

Although dated 1998, there is no research since that invalidates the results. In fact, the March 2003 report, "NHTSA Light Vehicle Antilock Brake System Research Program Task 5.2/5.3," by the U.S. Department of Transportation, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, (DOT HS 809-561) restates Kahane's research results and adds, "On wet roads, fatal run-off-road crashes increased by 17 percent, and non-fatal crashes run-off-road crashes increased by 24 percent [with ABS]."

While the data indicates a reduction of certain types of fatal and non-fatal crashes, for others there are increases, such as those on dry or gravel roads, thereby offsetting any benefit results from ABS.

While the total raw-data rate of fatal and non-fatal crashes have fallen, the evidence does not support that it is due to the installation of ABS.

Dusty

cpsdarren · February 2006

"The effectiveness of ESC, much like ABS"

I am interested in published and/or any peer reviewed references disputing safety benefits of ESC.

artgpo · February 2006

You forgot the all important compass.

dustyk · February 2006

Unfortunately I'm not aware of any at this point. The available study on ESC has been very minimal and very limited in scope. The current post analysis research indicates significant benefit from ESC. The problem is that such initial research almost always indicates huge benefit, like seat belts, air bags, and ABS.

In "Preliminary Results Analyzing the Effectiveness of Electronic Stability Control (ESC) Systems, DOT HS 809-790 (2004), the author's data analysis suggests a 35 percent reduction in single vehicle crashes in passenger cars, and a 67 percent in SUVs, 30 percent in fatal single vehicle crashes, and 63 percent in SUVs.

There are issues with the study, but like most advocate research it is absent any statistical critique. First, the study relied very heavily on two makes of 1997-2002 passenger cars, the Mercedes and the BMW, as well as SUVs although some Toyota and Lexus models were included. The study could only be conducted on vehicles that had ESC installed as factory standard equipment.

The real problem in the current ESC research is the post analysis input. As noted by former NHTSA director Dr. Ricardo Martinez*:

"...despite the high-tech nature of motor vehicles today, current methods of crash investigation rely on 'analyzing the archaeology of the crash,' subjective witness statements, and expert opinion to determine the 'facts.'"

He adds,

"...that the movement from mechanical to electrical systems and sensors means that physical evidence of the crash is diminishing [emphasis added]. For example, anti-lock brakes reduce skid marks, making it more difficult to make determinations about wheel and vehicle behavior."

In addition, the current number of crash cases are extremely limited and available data is skewed towards the more serious crashes.

ESC may very well be effective, but to what degree is pure conjecture. Like we've seen with other proposed safety devices, after adoption the effectiveness amazingly decreases, sometimes dramatically. In the meantime people are paying increased vehicle prices to experiment on a large scale.

Dusty

*The Federal Register, vol. 69, #113, Monday, June 14, 2004

socalawd · February 2006

ESC may very well be effective, but to what degree is pure conjecture. Like we've seen with other proposed safety devices, after adoption the effectiveness amazingly decreases, sometimes dramatically. In the meantime people are paying increased vehicle prices to experiment on a large scale.

Well historicially your argument just dosen't work! Here is some information from, President Dwight D. Eisenhower and the Federal Role in Highway Safety. I am very happy that safety sells and the high end items get used on lower priced cars. Do you really think the next DCX van won't have VSC on it?? BTW according to NHSTA data 1999-2002 the DCX had over 25% of it fatalities due to rollover!

Here is some historic data from that report!

The fatality rate per hundred million vehicle miles traveled had gone down steadily from 11.4 in 1940 to 5.2 in 1962, then began rising again in 1963 and registered 5.7 in 1964.

As of 2004 now at 1.46, do you think thats by accident?? Wearing your seatbelt alone more than doubles your chances of surviving a auto accident(that certainly was a experiment that paid off). ABS will consistantly stop a car on wet and dry surfaces faster than non ABS. But it can have longer stopping times on gravel and snow. The bad thing about ABS is the end user needs to know how to use it. In studies nearly 50% of people still think you should pump the brakes. Also how many people out there have gone to a parking lot and tryed to brake hard and steer at the same time. ABS is a practiced skill, except noone pratices it! VSC does it's job with no input from the driver. While to some this may sound scary. To me it helps because most people don't have any experience with loss of control situations! ESC may prove to be less effective than touted but I am happy to be involved in this experiment. While the DCX guys are just the control group!

cpsdarren · February 2006

"Unfortunately I'm not aware of any at this point"

In that case, I shall await further studies before disabling my own ESC or recommending that others avoid this feature on new vehicles.

jipster · February 2006

"movement from mechanical to electrical systems and sensors means that physical evidence of the crash is diminishing"

Couldn't possibly agree more with Dr. Martinez and dustyk. Exactly(somewhat

) what the Jipster has stated on several other threads/boards...though admittedly not as well researched and articulated as that provided by dustyk.
I'll take ESC...but I'd still like to see a LOT more studies AND proof before jumping on the "ESC is the greatest thing since sliced bread" bandwagon.

cpsdarren · February 2006

"but I'd still like to see a LOT more studies AND proof before jumping on the "ESC is the greatest thing since sliced bread" bandwagon."

Technically, one could say the same about Stow 'n Go. Been Googling for a scientific, peer reviewed paper on its superiority, but am striking out so far...

hayneldan · February 2006

Please post the source of your information on fatalities. A search of NHSTA site only released info for ALL 2004 minivans (not by brand) and showed out of 2,561 crashes of ALL minivans showed a fatality rate of 4.4% for ALL minivans.

socalawd · February 2006

Please post the source of your information on fatalities. A search of NHSTA site only released info for ALL 2004 minivans (not by brand) and showed out of 2,561 crashes of ALL minivans showed a fatality rate of 4.4% for ALL minivans.

What information are you talking about and where did this come from?? :confuse:

aaron_t · February 2006

How about lower cost for the DCX? Some people proclaim ESC was a major factor in paying a premium for their minivan. I don't care if someone uses the extra convenience of Stow N go or not, but the DCX vans are cheaper (by how much is quite another topic).

hayneldan · February 2006

Your post 6572. my post source nhtsa.dot.gov

cpsdarren · February 2006

"How about lower cost for the DCX?"

I'm sure upfront pricing is the most important factor for many buyers. For others it might be ease of carrying cargo, while some put the premium on safety. Some buy one model over another for a particular shade of a certain color paint. It's all good.

cpsdarren · February 2006

Make sure the units are the same, i.e. per crash, per million vehicle miles traveled, etc.

The NHTSA's fatal crash database can be found here:

http://www-fars.nhtsa.dot.gov/

The CDC also has a lot of fatality information, including:

http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm4818a1.htm

dustyk · February 2006

ESC might be the greatest thing since sliced bread, but so far the evidence that past vehicle safety features are responsible for lives saved is more blind faith than empirical. The contention that fatalities have been reduced because of mandatory or optional safety equipment is statistically insupportable. The US traffic death rate had and has been in decline well before mandatory safety equipment was required on motor vehicles.

Why do you think the installation of Event Data Recorders has been received with either luke-warm or negative response? You'd think having pre-crash data available for analysis would be glowingly embraced.

hayneldan · February 2006

http://www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/pdf/nrd-30/NCSA/TSFAnn/TSF2004.pdf page 79 of 222

socalawd · February 2006

ESC might be the greatest thing since sliced bread, but so far the evidence that past vehicle safety features are responsible for lives saved is more blind faith than empirical. The contention that fatalities have been reduced because of mandatory or optional safety equipment is statistically insupportable. The US traffic death rate had and has been in decline well before mandatory safety equipment was required on motor vehicles.
Why do you think the installation of Event Data Recorders has been received with either luke-warm or negative response? You'd think having pre-crash data available for analysis would be glowingly embraced.

Yep you can have a study that shows lots of stuff. I would think that you don't like any data that isn't part of your conventionial wisdom. From the mid 50's to the mid 60's death rates per MMT were very steady. The real start of making vehicles more safe by engineering controls started then. Before that their was very little interest in safety equipment or safer vehicle design. I guess we should have our guys at NASCAR throw out thier helmets, safety restriants, and get rid of that dang safety cage and those silly flame resistant suits. Because it just dosen't seem to work.

Duskyk I'll take blind faith over no faith in anything every time. The data is pretty compelling but hey you can try and go forward or you can just do nothing. As a rumor(which I think is probably untrue) says they wanted to close the patent office because everything that needs to be has already been invented! Technology and invention is truely wahat makes the United States great!!

socalawd · February 2006

ALL 2004 minivans (not by brand) and showed out of 2,561 crashes of ALL minivans showed a fatality rate of 4.4% for ALL minivans.

No it dosen't it shows that 4.4% of fatalities happen in minivans as compared to other body types. Also the 2,561 crashes are not total crashes but fatality crashes. The total number of car crashes was over 10 million. One can estimate that minivan crashes were probably about 400K-500K. It is only speculation since it is in the light truck group!!

I think this is what you want!! Look at the leader of the group 1999-2002 honda Odyssey, the bottom of the pack Dodge Caravan!!

link title

marine2 · February 2006

We found some ramps on the Internet and ordered them. My next picture will show how to get a wheel chair in my van. You can't get anymore family friendly than that. This van is going to do things I never dreamed of doing when I bought it and I had some pretty good ideas of how I was going to use it then.

I didn't get the bassinet over to my daughter's house none to soon. She had a baby girl yesterday.

rorr · February 2006

"I think this is what you want!! Look at the leader of the group 1999-2002 honda Odyssey, the bottom of the pack Dodge Caravan!!"

Nice try socalawd BUT....

The vans listed (1999-2002 Ody and '01-'02 DGC) have been redesigned since then. It may take a little while for similar data to be collected pertaining to the current generation of Ody/DGC.

Of course, by then, both Honda and DCX will probably have released the next generation....

aaron_t · February 2006

Congratulations, Grandpa!

socalawd · February 2006

The vans listed (1999-2002 Ody and '01-'02 DGC) have been redesigned since then. It may take a little while for similar data to be collected pertaining to the current generation of Ody/DGC.

This is a forum about DCX vs Honda Ody's this is relivent information. Also the Caravan SWB is not redesigned it is the same van as listed and it had the HIGHEST fatality rate.

rorr · February 2006

"Also the Caravan SWB is not redesigned..."

I had assumed the Carvan SWB was redesigned with the rest of the lineup in '05 ('04?). If it is still the same, it makes me wonder just how much of a 'redesign' the DGC received. I know it received the new sto'n'go and some revised exterior sheetmetal/interior appointments. But now I wonder if it received anything which would have helped it's fatality rate?

thegraduate · February 2006

I didn't get the bassinet over to my daughter's house none to soon. She had a baby girl yesterday.

What are you doing in this forum? Go hold that baby!

Congrats, paw paw!

socalawd · February 2006

I didn't get the bassinet over to my daughter's house none to soon. She had a baby girl yesterday.

Congrats! Hope mother and baby are doing well!! The only problem with babies is they grow up too fast.

nwng · February 2006

what? just the bassinet? what about the crib, rocking chair for the mom, boxes of diapers, baby swings.... Stow n fill the whole van for crying out loud!

Congrats!

socalawd · February 2006

But now I wonder if it received anything which would have helped it's fatality rate?

It did get the kneeblockers and for later 2005 models after the redesign a modification was made that improved crashtest ratings

cpsdarren · February 2006

"ESC might be the greatest thing since sliced bread, but so far the evidence that past vehicle safety features are responsible for lives saved is more blind faith than empirical. The contention that fatalities have been reduced because of mandatory or optional safety equipment is statistically insupportable."

Every time I've seen a paper on the topic at a conference, the data has always been pretty compelling that seatbelt use has a very strong correlation to motor vehicle crash fatalities. Yeah, they could all be wrong I suppose. Plus, there are always going to be those who don't believe it and refuse to wear seatbelts. Some people don't believe the Earth is round, either, but least they don't fall off if they go too far. Well, I guess I can't prove they don't, so who knows?

Things like airbags and other safety features have much weaker correlations. That doesn't mean they aren't saving many lives, but it does give detractors a lot more room to spread propaganda. On the plus side, as far as I know, few if any states have laws preventing people from disabling airbags or stability control systems. So, even skeptics who don't want to drive something from the 1980s still have some choices. I guess we could always leave it to natural selection. This is a fine example:

http://www.dailynebraskan.com/vnews/display.v/ART/2004/09/17/414a5a030e91d?in_ar- chive=1

http://www.journalstar.com/articles/2005/01/04/local/doc41db350078259784029686.t- xt

Yup. Who needs things like seatbelts, stability control or rollover side curtain airbags.

"The US traffic death rate had and has been in decline well before mandatory safety equipment was required on motor vehicles."

If true, this assumes there were no other factors involved and that there was no widespread voluntary safety equipment of the same type. It is possible to isolate other variables. I'm sure one could google for such information, but again, no one can force anyone to believe it anyway.

"Why do you think the installation of Event Data Recorders has been received with either luke-warm or negative response? You'd think having pre-crash data available for analysis would be glowingly embraced."

For the same reason people hate recorders of any type- fear of Big Brother. I remember the uproar some groups had about "Vchip" in television sets being some method of governmental monitoring- I can't imagine what they spread about vehicle data recorders.

"Yes, Officer, what seems to be the problem here?"

"One moment, Sir, while I plug into your vehicle data recorder."

jipster · February 2006

"Some people don't believe the earth is round"

Really??? Unless you have an unfrozen Neanderthal in your basement, I doubt this is true.

Seatbelts and airbags prevent injuries "after" inital impact, it is obvious these devices are benefical. How benefical VSC is...is questionable in my book. But, believe whomevers "conference" "paper"s you want.

"One moment sir while I plug into your vehilce data recorder"

On vehicle data recorders...I believe police officers have been writing speeding tickets(any many other traffic violations) for many years now without them. If they help gather saftey information and get druken drivers and wreckless individuals(who put you and your loved ones lives in danger) off the roads...then I'm all for them.

cpsdarren · March 2006

"Really??? Unless you have an unfrozen Neanderthal in your basement, I doubt this is true."

If you live in the United States, unfrozen Neanderthals comprise a modest portion of the population. In any case, I'm sure you can Google up some good webpages on the topic. A friend once joined a club promoting this topic, thinking it was a big joke. Not only wasn't it a joke, but it was apparently a group of very serious conspiracy theorists, from ultra right wing para militia types to ultra left-wing anarchists to ordinary people who just have a lot of fear. Not your average suburbanites, perhaps, but there are a lot of these people out there.

"Seatbelts and airbags prevent injuries "after" inital impact, it is obvious these devices are benefical. How benefical VSC is...is questionable in my book. But, believe whomevers "conference" "paper"s you want."

If it's obvious to you that seatbelts [and airbags] are beneficial, why dispute my comments about them? Dustyk was the one who implied that they are not statistically shown to be beneficial.

Yeah, it's a free country, one doesn't have to believe peer-reviewed papers or any consensus of studies on seatbelts or any other topic. For some, it's easier to believe an anonymous troll on the internet with unknown credentials, claiming all the proof about a spherical earth (or whatever) is worthless but citing no credible information of their own. At that point, one could just as well join a flat Earth club.

VSC is relatively new. I agree that the data we have so far is not conclusive. Even so, both from the theory of the design and from the data so far, I wouldn't buy an SUV or van without it. If someone feels differently, they are welcome to disable it or purchase a vehicle without it. Again, still legal in 50 states as far as I know.

Seatbelts, on the other hand, have a lot of data to support their efficacy and many states have primary use laws as a result. If someone doesn't believe seatbelts prevent deaths, then they're probably better spending the time writing state legislators or giving presentations at conferences on highway safety than debating the issue on auto forums, IMO. I do give credit to the student mentioned in the links I gave. At least he was trying to do something useful to support his strong beliefs.

"On vehicle data recorders...I believe police officers have been writing speeding tickets(any many other traffic violations) for many years now without them. If they help gather saftey information and get druken drivers and wreckless individuals(who put you and your loved ones lives in danger) off the roads...then I'm all for them."

I agree. But the original question from Dustyk was why the public received them with a luke warm or negative response. You remember, those unfrozen Neanderthals who find Big Brother under every rock and those who don't want to be further implicated when they are speeding or driving impaired. I gave an answer- I didn't say I was against them, personally.

jipster · March 2006

"VSC is relatively new. I agree that the data we have so far is not conclusive"

:confuse: Isn't that what rustyk, and myself, have been saying all along??? Or, perhaps Neanderthal man has overpowered you and gained control of your computer?

I think if one is a defensive and cautious driver VSC is not needed. I don't think the same could be said for seatbelts and airbags though. Like I said before, if the vehilce I was purchasing had VSC I would buy it...but it's not such a big deal that I wouldnt buy the vehilce I wanted just because it(VSC) wasn't available.

thegraduate · March 2006

I think if one is a defensive and cautious driver VSC is not needed.

I tend to disagree there. I have spoken by example, and will give you the story again should you prefer, but it involved swerving to avoid a car coming at me on the wrong side of the road, and a fishtail ensued. Skidmark was 75 feet long without measuring the curve of it.

VSA would have braked proper wheels and accelerated others, to help me steer properly to the side. Yes, I may have still ended up in the guardrail, I likely would have avoided that initial spin that sent me into the other lane of traffic (luckily I missed that car). And yes, I was cautious...I slowed to 45 in a 50 because I saw this guy coming up on the wrong side of the road at about 75-80 MPH, passing every car (its a two lane road on a hill w/bridge) so I figured I'd slow up and let him go around me easier. Unfortunately, he met a car sooner than he got passed me, and swerved at me in his F-150.

Nobody stopped, not even witnesses! People amaze me sometimes. I doubt any of the concerned citizens on this board would've passed by me though, especially since they had to drive around my bumper (left in the road) to keep going on their way.

jipster · March 2006

" I tend to disagree there"

Yeah...me too.

I should have written "VSC is generally not needed by cautious drivers". There is always that remote possibility some nut will chose the wrong side of the road to drive on...or other similar circumstances.

I know what you're talking about when you have to drive those hilly, curvy, two lane highways. Super dangerous.
And yeah...I think most members on this board probably would have stopped to have helped...even the Ody owners with those nice clean interiors that they don't like to get dirty.

cpsdarren · March 2006

"Isn't that what rustyk, and myself, have been saying all along???"

If so, then you have no major disagreement with my main points. I suggest you might have more of a disagreement with dustyk about the seatbelt issue.

"I think if one is a defensive and cautious driver VSC is not needed."

Indeed, if anything more than a small minority of drivers were truly defensive and cautious, we wouldn't even be having this discussion. Sadly, even the most skilled drivers in the best handling cars can't always avoid the typical idiot on the cellphone in the oncoming truck.

"Like I said before, if the vehilce I was purchasing had VSC I would buy it...but it's not such a big deal that I wouldnt buy the vehilce I wanted just because it(VSC) wasn't available."

All I said to start this topic was that I thought ESC was more important for a minivan/SUV than a Civic. So, all I'm still saying is that it would be a bigger deal for me depending on the type of vehicle I wanted. I never said ESC was the best thing since sliced bread, but I do think it is a valuable safety feature given what we currently know.

thegraduate · March 2006

even the Ody owners with those nice clean interiors that they don't like to get dirty.

Hey, you know us well (my folks anyway). The car was driveable, but the bumper was completely pulled off the car. Rather than put it in the back of our van, my granddad came to the "crash site" and drove the bumper to the dealership (where we dropped off the wrecked car) in the back of his Frontier pickup.

Hey, jip, are you on Carspace.com?

You should, so we can see each other's vehicles!

jipster · March 2006

When speaking of VSC surveys and studies you wrote in post #3557.. "Also, gotta love people who refuse to believe anything regardless of how compelling the evidence" Which led me to believe you think the evidence FOR VSC is fairly strong. Then you proceeded to question rustyk about his position, on questioning how effective ESC is.

Then in #6594 you write,"VSC is relatively new. I agree that the data we have so far is not conclusive" So,did you go to the John Kerry School of Debate...or are you just trying to keep things lively in here?

Reguardless, I'm sure our host and other members grow weary of our slightly off topic

discussion on VSC..so perhaps we should move on.

jipster · March 2006

"Hey,jip, are you on Carspace.com?"

Well, I'm not sure. :confuse: I checked it out about a week ago(not really sure what it's all about)then got a couple e-mails from other members asking me to sign up.It looks to be an expanded/more in depth look at one's profile? I'll take another look. I think it would be pretty cool to see other members vehilces...and perhaps a face(for those brave enough)to go along with all these posts I've been reading from you guys for the past year and a half. :shades:

cpsdarren · March 2006

"When speaking of VSC surveys and studies you wrote in post #3557.. "Also, gotta love people who refuse to believe anything regardless of how compelling the evidence" Which led me to believe you think the evidence FOR VSC is fairly strong."

Taken in context, that remark was basically playing devil's advocate with a previous comment that I quoted in the same post #6557. Also, as I explained in post #6560, that comment was a generalization and not specific to any particular topic or person.

"Then you proceeded to question rustyk about his position, on questioning how effective ESC is."

I did ask dustyk for references to support his claim that the effectiveness of ESC is in dispute (post 6566). Having an open mind, I was genuinely interested to read any such studies, and still am.

Do you mean aaron_t, maybe? I did ask him if he thought ESC would be more important on a minivan or a Civic (post 6560). After all, that was the issue that started this thread, so it seemed like a fair question since I had already given my answer.

Then in #6594 you write,"VSC is relatively new. I agree that the data we have so far is not conclusive"

I don't recall ever stating that data on VSC is absolutely conclusive. If I did, I apologize, as that was not my intent. I certainly believe VSC is a good technology and increases safety. I never intended to imply that we have enough data to prove it beyond a doubt, or even nearly as much as has been done for seatbelts.

"So,did you go to the John Kerry School of Debate...or are you just trying to keep things lively in here?

Reguardless, I'm sure our host and other members grow weary of our slightly off topic discussion on VSC..so perhaps we should move on."

Fair enough. I only ask that if you are going to take my comments out of context or infer from them between the lines, you might ask for a clarification before throwing out insults or implying that I flip flopped on something.

dustyk · March 2006

It is unfortunate the suggestion that some safety equipment has a nebulous or inefficacious desired effect produces sardonic responses of disbelief, but as history denotes some of the greatest contemporary and accepted "facts" were based on myth or naiveté. In an era of enlightenment the proclamation that some would rather rely on "blind faith" is telling and notable by itself. Obviously, facts countering ones beliefs must be rejected on the face of it because it flies in the face of self-serving conventional wisdom. Skeptics, therefore, are characterized as the lunatic fringe, a response intended to hide and excuse the critics off-hand rejection as well as elicit others to pause before giving any serious thought to the idea. A little academic dishonesty goes a long way.

It can only be implausible to some that seat belts may have less value than perceived but we "know" that seat belt save lives, a basis that exists in a plethora of "scientific study," produced by dozens of non-conspiratorial entities and retold countless times. Unfortunately the sole determining evidence that seat belts "save lives" is based on the mere fact that someone lived or someone died. In this case the so-called raw data analysis is patently outside the generally accepted rules for solid scientific research and counter to the position of the otherwise "blind faith" believers in conventional wisdom.

The proposition being put forth is that the effectiveness of the seat belt is not known anywhere to the degree for which it is believed. It is a blind faith assumption that wearing a seat belt will produce a saved life in every incident. In fact, we know that in some cases the use of automotive safety equipment has taken a life, for example airbags. Despite the stubborn disbelief, there is evidence that seat belts have been responsible for loss of life as well. It must be noted that the advent of the Supplemental Airbag System is a direct result of safety industry studies showing that the lap belt and the automatic shoulder belt systems were the cause of injuries and deaths.

Professor Sam Peltzman of the University of Chicago as well as others have performed cross sectional regression analysis of automobile safety equipment. These studies found that there were two opposing effects with respect to auto safety equipment. These studies show that while the number of driver deaths appear to be reduced by the equipment, there was a near corresponding increase in driver deaths from increased reckless driving behavior. Therefore, the knowledge that a driver was "safer" encouraged increased risk-taking driving. Several studies indicate that the assumed life saving potential of auto safety equipment has been completely offset by an overall increase in death.

While it may be fashionable to consider ideas counter to the conventional wisdom on the fringe of pedestrian discussion, those that do at least are in pretty good company. A following post contains references.

My apologies to the Host in advance. These are the last post from me on this subject!

dustyk · March 2006

American Journal of Surgery, titles: "Seat belt trauma to the abdomen"; 3-67; pp346,350 (lap-only belt); "The seat belt syndrome", 12-68; pp 831-3; "Bowel injuries from automobile seat belts," 3-72; pp 312-16.

The Association of Trial Lawyers of America, Washington, D.C; Trial magazine, published by ATLA, April 1990, title: "Auto Seat Systems -- dangerous safety restraints?" by Buddy Rake, Jr, and Scott E. Boehm. (Comments by authors: "During a frontal collision, injuries to belted front-seat occupants can result because of two types of defective seat designs. ...")

Berens, Michael J., The Columbus Dispatch (Ohio), November 17, 1996; title: "Wheels of Justice," Contact: http://www.dispatch.com/news/special/wheelsofjustice/wheelsofjustice.html.

British Medical Journal, 11-23-68; "Seat belt injuries"; pp485-6.

The Brookings Institute, 1986 book titled: Regulating the Automobile, (Conclusion: "The costs of programs to regulate automobile safety, fuel economy, and emissions are greater than their benefit.")

Dawesm R. F. H., and J. A. Smnallwood and I. Taylor; University Dept. of Surgery, Southampton Gen'l Hospital, UK. British Journal of Surgery, vol 73, February 1986; title: "Seat belt injury to the female breast."

The Des Moines Register (Iowa), 6-18-92; (Cox News Service) title: "Safety officials accused of hiding facts on children killed in cars" (Lap only belts)

Dunn, Jr., James A., Brookings Institute (Washington, D.C.); "Driving Forces -- The automobile, its enemies, and the politics of mobility," 1998.

The Engineering Society, 400 Commonwealth Dr., Warrendale, PA. SAE Technical Paper Series 922515; title: "Mechanisms of Fracture in Ankle and Foot Injuries to Drivers in Motor Vehicle Crashes," by Diane C. Lestina...., Insurance Institute for Highway Safety; Reprinted from: 36th Stapp Car Crash Conference Proceedings, Seattle, Washington, Nov. 2-4, 1992. (Covers injuries with and without seat belt use.)

Filley, Dwight, Senior Fellow in Market Principles, The Independence Institute (Colorado), Issue Paper No. 1-99 January 20, 1999; title: "Risk Homeostasis and the futility of protecting people from themselves."

Galasko, Dr. Charles, professor of orthopedic surgery, University of Manchester; In an address during the Whiplash Association Disorders World Congress, Vancouver, Canada, under "Cost of seat belt related whiplash injuries rising," he noted that the number of patients with whiplash-related complaints more than tripled the year after seat belts were introduced in the UK in 1983. He also said awareness of the significance and impact of whiplash has been influence by under-recording and misclassification. He claimed as many as 45% of whiplash patients in the UK are not included in national injury data and suggested that there are probably close to 250,000 new whiplash patients in the UK every year. In the US, he said, the total probably approaches 1 million cases. Full details: http://www.cma.ca/cmaj/vol-160/issue-10/1425b.htm. The Canadian Medical Association Journal, May 18, 1999, published his presentation.

Garbacz, Christopher, Ph.D.; St. Louis Post-Dispatch, OP-ED; Oct. 30, 1990, title: "Seat belts don't necessarily save lives."

Population Research and Policy Review, 11-92; title: "Do front seat belt laws put rear seat passengers at risk?"

Applied Economics magazine, Dec. 1990, title: "How effective is automobile safety regulations?" ditto, 24, 1992; title: "More evidence of the effectiveness of seat belt laws" vol. 24; 1992.

Arkansas Gazette, Op-Ed; 5-13-91; title: "Seat belt laws pose risks of their own."

Economy Inquiry magazine; April 1991, pp 310-316; title: "Impact of the New Zealand seat belt law."

Economics magazine, letter to editor; 19, 1985; title: "A note on Peltzman's theory of offsetting consumer behavior."

Garrett, John W. and Paul W. Braunstein, M.D; Journal of Trauma, May 1962; pp220-237; title: "The Seat Belt Syndrome." (Comments by authors: "Just as the use of penicillin has led to numerous examples of penicillin allergy or anaphylactic reactions, so in the use of seat belts, many untoward situations and injuries.")

Greenberg, Ph. D., Stephen R., Journal of Forensic Sciences, January 1987, pp158; title: "Seat Belts and Human Rights: An Appraisal"

Halter, Mark; Wisconsin Medical Journal, two letters to editor; title: "Do seat belts save lives?" 1995, vol. 94, no. 3; "Buckling up: Whose choice should it be?" 2001:vol. 100, no. 2.

Highway Loss Data Institute, (part of the Insurance Institute For Highway Safety, Arlington, VA) title: "Seven County Crash Investigation" April 1992; (Concluded: ...the study "found no clear-cut evidence of comparable reductions" in overall injuries as reflected by accident claims.)

Hodge, Charles J., (lawyer), and Joseph Hodge, M.D., Medical Trial Technique Quarterly, Summer 1995, pp642-649; title: "Trauma and Cancer Associated With Seat Belt Shoulder Restraint in Motor Vehicle Accidents."

Institute For Injury Reduction, Post Office 375, Dunkirk, Maryland, (An organization run by trial lawyers); 2-1-90 News Media Release: Statement of Benjamin Kelly, President -- "Ending The Lap Belt Injury Epidemic." (Includes a list of 45 traffic accidents that occurred between June 1986 and October 1989, documenting the dangers of lap belts.)

Insurance Research Council, Oak Brook, IL (Survey of auto injury claims in MI, NJ and PA); "Catastrophic Auto Injuries" June 1992. (Conclusion: Cost of catastrophic injuries are way up since 1988 through 1991&emdash;which covers the same time frame most states passed seat belt laws.)

Investor's Business Daily, 11-13-96, title: "The truth about car air bags -- U.S. ignored data showing risks to kids, women," by John Marline. (This is similar to the DOT presently withholding full information from the public about the negative side of forced seat belt use, while giving widespread publicity for those saved by the belt.)

Jacoby, Jeff, The Boston Globe, Mass., 8-25-94: title: "Unbuckling the voters"(Comments on voters repealing Massachusetts' seat belt law and legislators passing another seat belt law in defiance of the "will of the people."

Kazman, Sam; Competitive Enterprise Institute; The CATO Review of Business and Government; Fall 1991; "Death by regulation" (On how federal fuel economy standards are killing people estimated to be between 2,000 to 4,000 additional deaths per year.)

Washington Post, (D.C.), 2-27-92; title: "Death by Government," an editorial on CAFE standards resulting in an increase in highway deaths.

Knox, Bob (Columnist, Sun-Sentinel newspaper, Ft. Lauderdale, FL), Readers Digest, 6-97; title: "Family Alert: How safe is your car?"

Krajick, Kevin, Psychology Today magazine, 5-86; title: "Do seat belts kill?"

Laberge-Nadeau, Claire, MD, Msc, CSPQ; Laboratory on Transportation Safety, Center for Research on Transportation, University of Montreal (Under a grant from AAA Foundation for Tr

dustyk · March 2006

Laberge-Nadeau, Claire, MD, Msc, CSPQ; Laboratory on Transportation Safety, Center for Research on Transportation, University of Montreal (Under a grant from AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety) title: "Neck Injuries Amongst Motor Vehicle Occupants Involved In a Collision," April 1993. (One notable conclusion: "Seat belted car occupants tend to suffer a higher proportion of neck injuries than unbelted occupants because while seat belts tend to prevent more severe head injuries, the belts make acceleration/deceleration of car occupant heads worse because of the sudden change of vehicle velocity.")

Landen, Larry; Prof. Of philosophy, University of Hawaii; book title: The Danger Ahead: The Risks You Really Face on Life's Highways, Wiley & Sons, 1997. (Amason.com has examples of pages from the book. The book exposes the various scare tactics about the dangers in life used to mislead and confuse the public by various groups, such as the government, the news media and certain industries in pursuit of their vested financial interests, which is similar to the scare tactics used by government in defending the supposed need and benefit of seat belt laws.)

Larder, D. R.; Twiss and Mackay; Accident Research Unit, The University of Birmingham, UK; title: "Neck Injury To Car Occupants Using Seat Belt." (Presented at the 29th Annual Proceedings, American Association For Automotive Medicine, October 7-9, 1985, Washington, D.C.)

Levine, Prof. Elliott, University of Winnipeg, Canada; Mature Medicine magazine, (Toronto, Canada); Can download: http://www3.sympatico.ca/medicine ; title: "Determinants of driver fatality risk in front impact fixed object collisions." (Highlights of article -- 1. This study finds no benefit to seat-belted car drivers in head on crashes, but dramatic increases in deaths to the most vulnerable drivers; 2. Earlier studies showing net benefits from wearing seat belts are found to involve critical flaws.: 3. Seat belt legislation may have done more harm than good.)

Winnipeg Free Press (Winnipeg, Canada); 1-21-92; OP-ED title: "Seat belts kill!"

McKenzie, Prof. Richard B., University of California-Irvine; Oakland Tribune newspaper, 2-10-85, title: "Air bags, Safety belts and personal freedoms."

National Safety Council, title: "Exploration of Impact Measures of Safety Belt Use Laws," 1990 report. (In the report it is stated: "In terms of frequency of cases, about 43,000 people were ejected from passenger cars in 1981, according to the National Accident Sampling System. Of these, about 6,000 were killed -- Clark & Surel, 1984. -- Such figures challenge the claim by seat belt law supporters that most ejections result in death.)

Traffic Safety magazine published by NSC, March/April 1987; title "With Seat Belt Use Laws -- Exemptions Are The Rule."

Nettler, Ph.D., Gwynne; Prof. emeritus, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada. Now lives in San Diego, CA; Liberty magazine; May 1994, title: "Trafficking in Numbers." (Dr. Nettler concluded, neither side has accurate or reliable statistics because of the very nature of how traffic accident data are currently recorded and compiled.)

Pappalardo, Kathleen M. (Former Regional Director, Highway Federation and former Project Coordinator, New Hampshire Highway Safety Agency). Her testimony before NH state legislature against passage of a seat belt law in 1985 as published by the Libertarian Party of San Bernardino County, CA; See at http://www.lpca.com/pappalar.htm.

Peltzman, Sam (Graduate School of Business, University of Chicago); Journal of Political Economy, vol 83, no. 42, 1975; title: "The effects of automobile safety regulation."

Robertson, Leon S., Ph.D., American Journal of Public Health, 11-74, title: "A controlled Study of the Effect of Television Messages on Safety Belt Use" (...shows that television campaigns do not have any effect on use of safety belts.)

Nanlee Research and Yale University; paper title: "Highway Deaths: False PR on the Effects of PR." (Exposes South Carolina's 1988 false claim on the success of seat belt law enforcement reducing highway deaths )

Ross, Philip, Forbes magazine, 9-6-99, p72-73; title: "Safety may be hazardous to your health."

Semmens, John, Heartland Institute, Chicago, IL; titles: "Air bags can kill you;" May/June 1996: Point of View Paper, "Hawaii's 'Successful' Seat Belt Law" 10-11-91. (His analysis disproves success); "Auto safety regulations: Hazardous to your health?" 1988; "Coercion is no cure for collision" 1-26-87.

Paper presented at the Transportation Research Forum's 28th annual meeting, November 16-18 1987, San Antonio, Texas; title: "What if everything we know about highway safety is wrong?"

Human Events, 5-30-87; title: "More rules don't always mean safer roads"

Sullum, Jacob, Senior editor, Reason magazine; Washington Times, June 16, 1999; title: "Proceed With Caution."

Tampa Tribune newspaper (Florida) 7-11-88; title: "Injuries to seat belt users accelerate in Florida," by Preston Trigg, Staff Writer. (Author comments: "The number of motorists injured wearing seat belts in Florida jumped from 77,086 in 1988 to 124,362 in 1987, an increase of 62 percent. Similarly, the number of motorists injured who weren't wearing seat belts dropped from 111,637 to 62,376 over the same period.")

Vitality magazine, 9-91; title: "Car seat alert: 20% of the children's car seats manufactured in the past 10 years are defective, but only 5.4% have been repaired or replaced."

Wildavsky, Ph.D., Aaron, Institute of Government Research, College of Liberal Arts, University of Arizona; 3-13-78; title: "No-risk is the highest risk of all."

On the Internet

Search the Internet for: Medifus.com -- Medifocus Guides (Medical information for legal professionals) "Litigation: Seat belt Injuries Case";

http://www.domelight.com/seatbelts1.html (Click "Spotlight Issues")

Web site: "Killerbelts"; http://www.barvennon.com/seatbelt.html.

CATO Institute, http://wwww.cato.org; Besides the article by Dr. John Adams listed under authors, above, the Institute has other articles relating to "Regulations."

Defective seat belt system designs, including buckles, can be found by searching the Internet under "seat belt buckle" or

"seat belt injuries," or various lawyers offering their services under "products liability" cases. This includes child safety seats, such as in 1992, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration ordered the recall of 1 million such devices. Also, back issues of Trial magazine, a magazine for trail lawyers, has details on products liability cases, which includes seat belt system design defects. One particular web site, http://www.medivillage.com, states:"For medical malpractice and personal injury attorneys who need authoritative medical literature to support a claim, identify the most experts and build a solid winning case litigation."

The Independence Institute, 14142 Denver West Parkway, Suite 185, Gold

cpsdarren · March 2006

"These studies show that while the number of driver deaths appear to be reduced by the equipment, there was a near corresponding increase in driver deaths from increased reckless driving behavior. Therefore, the knowledge that a driver was "safer" encouraged increased risk-taking driving. Several studies indicate that the assumed life saving potential of auto safety equipment has been completely offset by an overall increase in death. "

Even if true, it still seems fair to conclude that a non-reckless driver would still get the full benefit of the safety equipment, does it not?

"While it may be fashionable to consider ideas counter to the conventional wisdom on the fringe of pedestrian discussion, those that do at least are in pretty good company. A following post contains references."

Seems like a good start for those on the fringe to begin repealing the many state laws based on the mountain of data and studies presented by experts on the topic from various government, insurance and other agencies. Are such activites in progress on a national scale? It would also be a refreshing change to hear a well-presented and referenced presentation at a conference on these topics, such as the Lifesavers Conference or the Governor's Conference on Highway Safety. If you or any colleagues ever do present such a paper, please feel free to send me an email to the address in my profile. I try to maintain an open mind on these subjects and would enjoy being present in person for such a discussion.

Anyway, it is interesting to see that there are those who genuinely believe that seatbelt use does not result in a significant net decrease of fatalities, if that is what you are saying (apologies if I misunderstood). Usually, most detractors are only against the actual legislation aspect, not the safety aspect.

May I ask, do you use seatbelts or otherwise restrain yourself or members of your family while in a vehicle?

Out of more curiousity- If you do believe modern safety equipment does not improve one's chances of surviving a crash, do you save money and purchase vehicles with minimal safety equipment?

artgpo · March 2006

Consumer Reports once again listed the Odyssey as the best minivan for 2006. CR said "The Odyssey leads it class in agility, refinement and interior flexibility, Consumer Reports says. Electronic stability control and side curtain air bags are standard."

"Interior flexibility"? No "Stow and Go"?? What is wrong here?

Claires · March 2006

It's sort of a "My Space" for car enthusiasts, where you can track auto news feeds, upload your own photos, post your favorite links, send and receive email, and link to (or reject) friends, among other things. There are over 2000 members there already, so what are you waiting for?

(And yes... while the discussion about the effectiveness of safety features is interesting, it's time to get back to the topic at hand.)

Drive on over and see me!

marine2 · March 2006

even the Ody owners with those nice clean interiors that they don't like to get dirty.

Hey, you know us well (my folks anyway). The car was driveable, but the bumper was completely pulled off the car. Rather than put it in the back of our van, my granddad came to the "crash site" and drove the bumper to the dealership (where we dropped off the wrecked car) in the back of his Frontier pickup.

I knew that graduate, but thanks. These guys with their Hondas ( and they are very nice inside, beautiful) aren't going to take the chance of dirtying or tearing them up. They didn't buy them with the intention of hauling much of anything in them besides people, and they are perfect for that. But I wanted a van that could haul people and most of the stuff I use to put in my truck and the Dodge is perfect for that.

We need to give each minivan credit for what they do well. Because each one has an advantage over the other in certain ways. One should keep it in mind when buying a minivan. What are you primary going to use it for.

Thanks for the congrats. Mother and baby Maia are doing very well. (Not sure where the kids got that name from though)

artgpo · March 2006

How would you know what I want to haul? I don't think you would fold down your stow and go to haul a load of coal. Yes, the inside of my Odyssey is very nice but it is well constructed of good materials. I would not haul live barnyard animals back there but I can haul as much as you, all seats removed.

thegraduate · March 2006

Actually, I think Motor Trend (when testing DCX, TOY, and ODY) found the Dodge had the most interior room by 20cu.ft. over the Honda. This may have included the wells under the seats though.

rorr · March 2006

"I would not haul live barnyard animals back there..."

There are pictures floating around the web of a previous gen Odyssey loaded with two llamas.

Yes, I said llamas. Full grown llamas. And no, I not kidding.

http://www.odyclub.com/tech/llama/llama.htm

Honda Odyssey vs Dodge/Chrysler minivans

Comments

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles