Month: November 2016

Crash Victims Beware! The Doctor Maybe Too Tired To Save Your Life


Crash Victims Beware! The Doctor May Be Too Tired To Save Your Life

November, 2016

Dear Care for Crash Victims Community Members:

On every average day in the U.S.A. today about 100 Americans die of injuries from vehicle violence.  Another 400 Americans suffer serious injuries (burns, brain injuries, spinal cord injuries, amputations, etc.) from vehicle violence.

For 20 years I have worked to improve care for crash victims.  See https://www.careforcrashvictims.com/home/urgency

Today, medical “experts” are recommending emergency physicians work 24 hour shifts.  See https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/first-year-doctors-would-be-allowed-to-work-24-hour-shifts-under-new-rules/2016/11/04/c1b928c2-a282-11e6-8832-23a007c77bb4_story.html#comments

Thankfully, in this month of Thanksgiving, the American public is being warned.  Public Citizen reports: “Nov. 4, 2016Proposal to Allow First-Year Resident Physicians to Work 28 Hours in a Row Puts Residents, Patients, Public at Risk of Serious Injury, DeathAmericans Overwhelmingly Oppose ACGME Work-Hour Proposal WASHINGTON, D.C. − A proposal to allow first-year medical residents to work 28 hours in a row without sleep is a dangerous step backward and, if implemented, would expose residents, their patients and the general public to the risk of serious injury and death, Public Citizen said today. The Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) today proposed a new set of requirements for the number of hours worked by resident physicians. The proposal removes the five-year-old 16 consecutive-hour limit on first-year resident work shifts and allows them to work up to 28 hours straight without sleep, while caring for patients. The proposal comes amid intense pressure from dozens of physician groups to do away with the limit. “Study after study shows that sleep-deprived resident physicians are a danger to themselves, their patients and the public,” said Dr. Michael Carome, director of Public Citizen’s Health Research Group. “It’s disheartening to see the ACGME cave to pressure from organized medicine and let their misguided wishes trump public health.” See http://www.citizen.org/pressroom/pressroomredirect.cfm?ID=9048

U.S.A. or U.$.A.

Lou Lombardo

 

Crash Victim Story


Crash Victim Story

November, 2016

Dear Care for Crash Victims Community Members:

The NY Times carries a story of a crash victim that describes some of the consequences of crashes that we can and must work to prevent, treat, and rehabilitate.

The NY Times story also describes how it has set up a small fund to help the needy.   This is something we need to do much more of.  Please read it athttp://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/17/nyregion/neediest-cases-car-accident.html?rref=collection%2Fcolumn%2Fneediest-cases&action=click&contentCollection=nyregion&region=stream&module=stream_unit&version=latest&contentPlacement=2&pgtype=collection Under Joan Claybrook at NHTSA in the late 1970’s, I had a small part in studies of the importance of consequences of crashes on people.  See https://www.careforcrashvictims.com/effects-on-families
Imagine what we could do to end these tragedies if more such stories of crash victims could be produced and organized into a political force for setting a Vision Zero Goal.
Lou Lombardo

 

Corporate Auto Safety Standards & New Car Assessment Programs (NCAP)


Corporate Auto Safety Standards & New Car Assessment Programs (NCAP)

November, 2016

Dear Care for Crash Victims Community Members:
Present Day Story

Kudos to IIHS and NPR for an article on designs of vehicles by auto companies. IIHS conducted a frontal crash test of two Nissan vehicles.  Watch video of the test of a Nissan vehicle designed to meet U.S. standards with airbags and a Nissan designed and built without airbags for sale in Mexico.  See http://www.npr.org/sections/goatsandsoda/2016/11/20/502346360/crash-test-dummies-show-the-difference-between-cars-in-mexico-and-u-s?utm_source=npr_newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_content=20161127&utm_campaign=bestofnpr&utm_term=nprnews

The NPR Goats and Sodas article notes:“Nissan isn’t the only carmaker with different safety options for different markets. A 2017 Chevrolet Spark sold in the U.S. comes with 10 airbags. The same version sold in Mexico doesn’t come with any airbags, and like the Tsuru, it scored zero stars in crash tests.  Latin NCAP, along with its affiliate Global NCAP, has crash tested dozens of cars. Hyundai, Nissan, Renault, Suzuki, Datsun, Ford, Fiat, Kia, Volkswagen and others have all sold zero-star cars in middle- and low-income countries around the world. Many of the vehicles in question lack basic safety features that have been mandatory in the U.S. and European Union for almost two decades….

We reached out to Nissan for comment. A Nissan spokesman said the company was aware of the “car-to-car crash demonstration” test and noted: “Nissan vehicles meet or exceed safety regulations for the markets in which they are sold. The Tsuru has been one of the most popular subcompact vehicles in Mexico for more than three decades due to its affordability and its proven reliability. Nissan Mexico recently announced it will discontinue Tsuru production in May 2017.” He added that Nissan in Mexico has incorporated safety features in its current vehicle lineup.

When we asked GM about safety disparities, a spokesman told Goats & Soda that all of its cars will meet minimum safety standards by 2019, and that “front dual airbags and three-point seat belts in all seating positions [will be] standard” on eight models by 2018.”

Past Nissan NCAP Story

Years ago Nissan failed a NHTSA crash test and sent a couple of engineers to complain that we had not tested their car properly.  We reviewed the test and said that the test was performed properly.  They protested that we had not connected the shoulder belt properly by passing it through a small plastic positioning hook at the latch.  The Nissan engineers were not happy when we told them that we were not permitted under the test procedures to perform that additional step in the buckling up of the dummy.  
Weeks later the Nissan engineers returned showing that they had made modifications and how their new test results compared with all other manufacturers. They showed us a plot of crash test results from all manufacturers ranked from best to worst.  Then with great visible pride they pointed out their new results to be right in the middle.  Shocked, I blurted out “You aimed for and achieved mediocrity in safety?”
Past Honda NCAP Story
Evidence of the safety importance of NCAP tests were documented in a 1993 NHTSA Report to Congress.  See https://www.careforcrashvictims.com/assets/NCAPReporttoCongress1993.pdf
The origin of NCAP testing began at NHTSA under the leadership of Joan Claybrook during the late 1970’s.  At the time, Honda had launched the 1979 Civic.  In one of our first tests, the 1979 model Honda Civic failed.  The following year we crash tested the 1980 Honda Civic, and it too failed.  Honda then made several safety modifications beginning with the 1981 Civic model that resulted in passage of the crash tests in what was the new NCAP Program.
A decade later, I was managing a NHTSA program at the University of Miami studying crashes, injuries, treatments, and outcomes.  We had a serious crash involving a 1981 Civic where the driver surprisingly survived.  Knowing of the improvements made by Honda to the 1981 Honda Civic, we decided to investigate whether there was statistical evidence of life saving in the real world experience of vehicles with the safety improvements.
The 1993 NHTSA Report to Congress on NCAP has the safety story on the 1981 Honda Civic.  See pp. 79 – 82.  The Report describes physical changes in the 1981 Civic that had been made after the 1979 and 1980 Civics had failed the new NCAP tests.   The crash test data of the 1981 safety improvements to reduce forces to the head and chest is shown Table 5.  Table 6 shows the real world results of the improvements in reducing the fatality rates by 42% based on 1982-1988 FARS Data. This is a specific example of the importance of crash testing to stimulate safety features that result in significant reductions in fatalities.  Unfortunately, the NHTSA Report to Congress did not include that I was told, by Honda’s Chief Engineer, that the costs to Honda for these mechanical improvements amounted to about $13.60 per vehicle.
Lou Lombardo

 

Tributes To Clarence M. Ditlow, III on How One Man’s Life Saved – & Continues To Saves – Many Lives


Tributes To Clarence M. Ditlow, III on How One Man’s Life Saved – & Continues To Save – Many Lives

November, 2016

Dear Care for Crash Victims Community Members:

Tributes to the great contributions to safety of us all made by Clarence Ditlow continue to be published.

Video of Clarence’s inspirational and informative presentation this past Spring at the Nader Conference is at https://youtu.be/TiYi2zjEp5c?t=5h4m45s
Ralph Nader’s excellent article on Clarence, the man,  and Clarence’s work since 1970 is at https://nader.org/2016/11/11/the-guardian-angel-for-americas-motorists/
Consumer Reports has an excellent article by Jeff Plungis at http://www.consumerreports.org/car-safety/clarence-ditlow-passionate-advocate-for-car-safety/
The LA Times fittingly (because LA has been a leader in dealing with auto related matters for decades) carried an informative article by Ralph Vartabedian on Clarence at http://www.latimes.com/local/california/la-me-ditlow-obit-20161111-story.html
Consumer Federation of America’s Jack Gillis wrote about Clarence See attached. 
Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety’s Jackie Gillan remembered Clarence at  http://saferoads.org/2016/11/12/statement-on-the-death-of-clarence-ditlow/
Automotive News remembers Clarence Ditlow’s work at:http://www.autonews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20161111/OEM02/161119972
It is true, as the centuries old saying states “Whoever saves one life, saves all of humanity”.  
It is also true that Clarence’s life saved all of humanity many times over and will continue to do so long into the future.
As Newton said we stand on the shoulders of giants.
But as Clarence would have urged we must continue his good work since in just the U.S.A. today
*  100 lives are lost to vehicle violence injuries each day
*  400 Americans suffer serious injuries each day from vehicle violence
*  $2 Billion (DOT values) are lost each day to vehicle violence
And all this at a time when never before in the history of humankind have we had available more technology and science to end vehicle violence in or by new vehicles in a decade.
What we lack is a Vision Zero Goal.  See www.careforcrashvictims.com
Lou Lombardo

 

Statement of Center for Auto Safety on Clarence M. Ditlow III


Statement of Center for Auto Safety on Clarence M. Ditlow III

November, 2016

Dear Care for Crash Victims Community Members:

I am beyond sad to pass along this announcement of a tragic loss for humanity.  Clarence’s long, hard and great work for safety for more more than 4 decades made us all safer.

“November 11, 2016

Clarence M. Ditlow, III, the Executive Director of the Center for Auto Safety since 1976, died on November 10 at the George Washington University Hospital in Washington. He was 72 years old.

Spanning four decades, his work forced the auto industry to make vast improvements in the safety, reliability and fuel efficiency of the vehicles on which Americans depend daily.

His accomplishments included safety recalls of tens of millions of vehicles that saved untold thousands of lives, and lemon laws in all 50 states.  Since the center was founded in 1970, the death rate on America’s roads has dropped dramatically, from 5.2 per 100 million vehicle miles traveled in 1969 to 1.1 per 100 million vehicle miles in 2010. Ralph Nader and Consumers Union established the Center to provide consumers a voice for auto safety and quality in Washington and to help owners of “lemon” vehicles fight back across the country.

Under Mr. Ditlow, the Center played a major role in these recalls, among others: 6.7 million Chevrolets for defective engine mounts, 15 million Firestone 500 tires, 1.5 million Ford Pintos for exploding gas tanks, and 3 million Evenflo child seats for defective latches.

In the past seven years alone, the Center was the primary force behind the recalls of 7 million Toyotas for sudden acceleration, 2 million Jeeps for fuel tank fires, 11 million GM vehicles for defective ignition switches, and more than 60 million faulty Takata airbag inflators.”

Time magazine’s cover of October 17, 2016 has a centuries old quote of wisdom and insight: “Whoever saves one life, saves all of humanity”.

 

http://www.autosafety.org/statement-of-the-center-for-auto-safety-on-the-death-of-executive-director-clarence-m-ditlow-iii/

Clarence’s work has saved and continues to save countless lives.
See tribute to this safety leader with video at https://www.careforcrashvictims.com/blog/blog-tributeditlowmarkey/
Lou Lombardo

 

Byron Bloch on Safe Designs For Autonomous Vehicles


Byron Bloch on Safe Designs For Autonomous Vehicles

November, 2016

Dear Care for Crash Victims Community Members:

Byron Bloch participated in the recent “Autonomous Vehicle Safety Regulation World Congress” held in Novi, Michigan and provided attendees with useful information to lawyers, engineers, and policy makers as autonomous vehicle development proceeds.   With Byron’s permission, his material is attached for your use.

Lou Lombardo

 

Consumer Advocates Sue NHTSA for Ignoring Automatic Emergency Braking Petition


Consumer Advocates Sue NHTSA for Ignoring Automatic Emergency Braking Petition

November, 2016

Dear Care for Crash Victims Community Members:

Press Release:Nov. 30, 2016

Contact: Harvey Rosenfield, harvey@consumerwatchdog.org, (310) 392-0072 Adina Rosenbaum, arosenbaum@citizen.org, (202) 588-7720 David Rosen, drosen@citizen.org, (202) 588-7742

Consumer Advocates Sue NHTSA for Ignoring Automatic Emergency Braking Petition

Agency Response to Request for Rules Requiring New Technologies Is Six Months Overdue

WASHINGTON, D.C. – Three of the nation’s leading consumer advocates have sued the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) in a federal district court in Washington, D.C., for failing to respond to a formal request that the agency require automakers to adopt advanced safety technologies that could prevent or limit the injuries and property damage from an estimated 910,000 automobile crashes every year.

On Jan. 16, Consumer Watchdog, the Center for Auto Safety and Joan Claybrook, former NHTSA administrator and president emeritus of Public Citizen, petitioned NHTSA to require cars to use Automatic Emergency Braking (AEB) – a set of three technologies that use combinations of radar, lidar (reflected laser light) and cameras to alert the driver and intervene if a rear-end crash is imminent.

Under federal law, NHTSA was supposed to grant or deny the petition within 120 days – by May 12. NHTSA has yet do to so.

In the meantime, on March 17, NHTSA announced that it had reached an agreement negotiated behind closed doors with 20 car companies to allow them to roll out weak versions of the technology on an unenforceable “voluntary” basis over a 10-year period, evading formal federal safety protections. Represented by Public Citizen and Consumer Watchdog, the plaintiffs filed the lawsuit on Nov. 23, asking the court to order NHTSA to issue a decision on the petition within 30 days.

As the complaint states: “The danger to public safety caused by defendants’ failure to initiate a rulemaking to require AEB technologies to be installed in light vehicles counsels in favor of expeditious action on plaintiffs’ petition. The pace of defendants’ decisional process is unreasonable in light of the statutory deadline for responding to the petition… and the nature and extent of the public interests at stake.”

“This year, NHTSA has devoted enormous agency resources to ‘driverless vehicles,’ which are years or even decades away, while a safety system that is ready to start saving lives right now has been relegated to the whims of the auto companies,” said Harvey Rosenfield, founder of Consumer Watchdog and one of the lawyers in the case.

“NHTSA continues to allow automakers to introduce advanced safety features at their own pace, by issuing ‘voluntary’ guidelines with no force of law,” said Michael Brooks, acting director at the Center for Auto Safety. “For too long, the agency has postponed requiring the proven lifesaving technology of Automatic Emergency Braking. NHTSA should immediately issue a rulemaking that defines performance requirements for these systems and mandates their installation in all vehicles without delay.”

“Voluntary standards don’t work,” said Claybrook, the former NHTSA administrator and president emeritus of Public Citizen. “They protect manufacturers, not consumers. AEB is one of the most important lifesaving automotive systems available today. Yet the U.S. Department of Transportation is refusing to use its statutory authority to assure that consumers can rely on a safe AEB system in every car sold in the U.S. and won’t even answer our consumer petition for action.”

“The agency’s time to respond to the petition has long since passed,” said Adina Rosenbaum, the attorney at Public Citizen representing the plaintiffs. “The agency should end its delay at once and comply with its statutory obligation to respond.”

About the Automatic Emergency Braking (AEB) Petition

AEB consists of a suite of three technologies:

  • Forward Collision Warning alerts a motorist (via audio or visual signals) that a collision with a car in front is imminent;
  • Crash Imminent Braking intervenes when the driver does not respond to the Forward Collision Warning by automatically applying the brakes to prevent a collision or reduce the vehicle’s speed at impact; and
  • Dynamic Brake Support applies supplemental braking when the braking applied by the driver is insufficient to avoid a collision.

NHTSA has already endorsed the AEB system and already rates new cars on whether they include these safety features. The agency is considering whether to require installation of the equipment in heavy vehicles such as trucks. But the voluntary agreement announced in March does not require that AEB become standard equipment in cars. Instead, it represents an unenforceable pledge to implement weak versions of the systems. Neither NHTSA nor consumers may challenge the automakers’ violation of the agreement.

A copy of the federal complaint is available for download here.  Click here to download a copy of the Jan. 16 petition and here to download the May 23 letter from the consumer advocates urging NHTSA to act on the petition.

#  #  #