Category: Blog

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

 

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

 

Center for Auto Safety Wins For the People In Court Decision on Chrysler Secrecy


Center for Auto Safety Wins For the People In Court Decision on Chrysler Secrecy

October, 2016

Dear Care for Crash Victims Community Members:

Please see the following article on important victory by Clarence Ditlow and the CAS to unseal FCA documents.

http://www.nationallawjournal.com/id=1202769118747/Chrysler-Loses-Supreme-Court-Fight-Over-Sealed-Documents?slreturn=20160904095005

Chrysler Group LLC’s battle with the Center for Auto Safety to keep sealed certain documents relating to an alleged defect in several vehicle models ended Mondaywhen the U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear the automaker’s appeal.

In FCA US v. Center for Auto Safety, the company had asked the justices whether the “good cause” necessary to place discovery documents under a protective order was sufficient to keep them sealed.                                          

“While FCA US is disappointed that the Supreme Court declined review, we look forward to presenting our case in the district court,” a Chrysler spokesman said.

In November 2013, several car owners sued Chrysler over the alleged power-system defect. Concerned that thousands of drivers might experience power-system failures, they sought a preliminary injunction ordering Chrysler to warn customers. Almost all of the evidence submitted by the car owners in support of the motion was sealed, as was evidence in opposition offered by Chrysler.

When the district court denied the motion, the Center for Auto Safety moved to intervene in the suit to seek the unsealing of the documents associated with the preliminary injunction motion.

The district court refused again to unseal the documents, saying that the “compelling reasons” standard that ordinarily applies to court records does not apply to non-dispositive motions, so preliminary-injunction motions may be sealed under a lower “good cause” standard.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit disagreed. The appeals court said the public’s right to access court records extends to preliminary injunctions and those records can only be sealed for compelling reasons.

In June, the Center for Auto Safety noted on its website that the Ninth Circuit’s decision was cited by U.S. District Judge Gonzalo Curiel in San Diego when he unsealed documents in the Trump University real estate school lawsuit.

Chrysler’s petition, filed by Thomas Dupree of Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher, had drawn support from the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the Washington Legal Foundation and other business groups. The Center for Auto Safety was represented in the high court by Leslie Bailey and Jennifer Bennett of Public Justice in Oakland.

Update: This story was updated with comment from FCA Group.

Contact Marcia Coyle at mcoyle@alm.com. On Twitter: @MarciaCoyle.

 

DOT Waffles on Ethical and Safety Issues of Autonomous Vehicles


DOT Waffles on Ethical and Safety Issues of Autonomous Vehicles

October, 2016

Dear Care for Crash Victims Community Members:

Mike Lemov has written an Op-Ed published in The Hill.

“On Sept. 20, the Department of Transportation, by law our primary national traffic safety enforcement agency, issued its long awaited “guidelines” for the development and sale of driverless cars. The Department attempted, Solomon-like, to balance its guidance between ensuring public safety and promoting the speedy development of driverless cars (called “Highly Automated Vehicles”) for use on our roadways.

For all its fanfare, DOT’s guidance failed to achieve its primary mission of ensuring safety.

DOT and its delegate agency NHTSA did not issue any new enforceable safety regulations for driverless vehicles, at least for the present. It did not propose any premarketing standards or requirements for automated cars, except to say it will shortly ask all producers of driverless cars and component systems to answer a comprehensive questionnaire about their proposed designs and test methods. Absent was any commitment by the federal government to actually regulate the new cars before they are sold to the public for use on public roads.

The omission is discouraging and could prove dangerous, particularly in view of the current record of partially automated vehicles getting into accidents. Some of these crashes have been deadly. It seems as if the guidelines were designed to preempt states such as California which already has issued enforceable safety regulations, such as requiring a driver and a steering wheel in all vehicles.

The Department did warn producers that the current penalties for not reporting a safety related defect publicly would apply to the automated cars, despite the weakness of the current penalties and the agency’s failure to force reporting of past lethal dangers of non-driverless cars, such as Toyota’s sudden acceleration, General Motors’s ignition shut off problem and Takata’s exploding airbags. In all these cases, and many more, the lack of adequate federal civil and any criminal sanctions apparently induced manufacturers to gamble on not reporting the accidents, even while people were being injured and killed.

The ethical and safety issues raised by the Department’s waffle are troubling.”  Seehttp://thehill.com/blogs/congress-blog/technology/302647-driverless-cars-ethics-and-public-safety

Hopefully, Congress will look into the ethical and safety failures of DOT officials who have allowed the rising rate of crash victims in the U.S.A. today:
*  100 deaths per day 
*  400 serious injuries per day
*  $2 Billion in losses per day
Lou Lombardo

 

Journal of Trauma Publishes Paper on Time and Place of Death From Automobile Crashes

Journal of Trauma Publishes Paper on Time and Place of Death From Automobile Crashes

October, 2016

Dear Care for Crash Victims Community Members:

Dr. Howard R. Champion, a surgeon who has worked to improve care for crash victims since at least 1986, has a new paper out in the Journal of Trauma (attached).

Short History of Efforts To Improve Care for Crash Victims

I have had the honor to work with Dr. Champion over the years.  A little background information.

1980’s – By 1980 the U.S. had lost 2.2 Million Lives to Vehicle Violence Dr. Champion was co-author of the landmark 1989 Journal of Trauma paper “Trauma Triage: Vehicle Damage as an Estimate of Injury Severity”.  See https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2724382  

At NHTSA, his work was very highly regarded and listed in CIREN Report HS 809 564 pp. 107 – 110.  Available at https://www.careforcrashvictims.com/assets/CIREN2.pdf

1990’s – By 1990 the U.S. had lost 2.7 Million Lives to Vehicle Violence Dr. Champion’s work in the 1980s contributed to the American College of Surgeons’ 1990 publication “Resources for the Optimal Care of the Injured Patient.”  In 1991, NHTSA faced a mystery of an air bag fatality that turned out to be an airbag success story – albeit a tragic story.  NHTSA had assigned me to manage a Congressional earmark project to build a Trauma Center in Miami, FL.  A small percentage of the project funding was allocated to research on crashes, injuries, treatments and outcomes.  One objective was to observe how new airbags coming into the fleet were performing. As NHTSA investigated its first air bag fatality on my project, NHTSA R&D became intensely aware of the need to improve triage, transport, and treatment decision-making for saving crash victims.  The Trauma Center had not yet been built and the crash victim was transported to the massive Jackson Memorial Hospital.  The crash victim had been in a very high severity multiple impact crash in a 1991 Volvo traveling at an estimated 60 mph into a traffic control box and then into a concrete pole.  He was unbelted and weighed 323 lbs.  He was initially stable.  He was later taken to the operating room for seemingly correctable problems.  He deteriorated, developed severe problems, found to have massive internal injuries and died of multiple organ system failure.

At NHTSA our focus was on the engineering of the Volvo airbag.  We brought together the leading bio-mechanics and airbag engineers to understand what caused the injuries.  We spent a year trying to determine whether the airbag was improperly designed, did the airbag go off on the first impact or the second impact, was the victim on the airbag when it went off?  Etc.  It turns out that the limits the Volvo airbag was designed for was about a 60 mph barrier impact for a belted, average size male – not an unbelted 323 lb. male in a multiple impact crash with the second impact into a concrete pole.
When I told a trauma surgeon from Baltimore about our engineering mystery, he pointed out that the emergency medical system including the hospital failed to immediately recognize the presence and severity of the internal injuries.   At the hospital, they did not know how severe the crash was because he lacked major facial injuries that were usually were present in severe crashes.  That led to Dr. Jeffrey S. Augenstein et al describing the challenge of identifying occult injuries in air bag protected crash victims.  See Case #91-002 inattached SAE paper 940714.

In 1993, NHTSA published a Research Note, that I co-authored, titled  “Detection of Internal Injuries in Drivers Protected by Air Bags”  See p. 37  at https://www.careforcrashvictims.com/assets/CIREN2.pdf

In 1994, NHTSA published a poster for the Emergency Medical community titled “Look Beyond the Obvious” to help detect internal injuries in air bag equipped vehicles.   See CIREN Progress Report #2, Pages 37-45 at https://www.careforcrashvictims.com/assets/CIREN2.pdf
In 1996, NHTSA Administrator Ricardo Martinez, the agency’s first emergency physician to head the agency, asked me to manage a research project with Dr. Champion as Principal Investigator to examine the relationships of crash characteristics to injuries.  I had the privilege of bringing together a team of high level medical and safety researchers.  We met monthly for a year analyzing available NHTSA data on crashes, injuries, and outcomes.
In 1997, Dr. Champion presented findings that it was possible to estimate the probability of the presence of serious injuries from crash data to the Administrator and top NHTSA executives – including demonstration of an URGENCY 1.0 algorithm.   The continued development of an URGENCY algorithm was recommended for improving post-crash injury control.  See https://www.careforcrashvictims.com/assets/MartinezBriefing3-27-97.pdf  And see https://www.careforcrashvictims.com/assets/Malliaris970393.pdf
Based on this work, I helped in the publication of papers by the team members on Automatic Crash Notification (ACN), URGENCY, and Air Medical Services.  See https://www.careforcrashvictims.com/home/urgency

In 1998, the research team produced the paper on Automatic Crash Notification published in AirMed.  See https://www.careforcrashvictims.com/assets/automatic-crash-notification.pdf

In 1999,  the team’s paper on URGENCY was published in AirMed.  See  https://www.careforcrashvictims.com/assets/urgency.pdf

In 1999, Dr. Champion presented a paper to the NTSB titled “Reducing Highway Deaths and Disabilities with Automatic Wireless Transmission of Serious Injury Probability Ratings from Crash Recorders to Emergency Medical Services Providers.”  See http://www.nhtsa.gov/cars/problems/studies/acns/champion.htm
In October 1999, the Congress, based in part on this research, enacted the Wireless Communications and Public Safety Act specifying 9-1-1 to be the “universal emergency telephone number” and finding that “emerging technologies can be a critical component…to reduce emergency response times and provide appropriate care.” In 1999, the FCC also issued rules for Enhanced 9-1-1 service to automatically provide location information to emergency dispatchers.
2000’s – By 2000 the U.S. had lost 3.1 Million Lives to Vehicle Violence
In 2001, NHTSA published an evaluation report on a limited test of Automatic Crash Notification (ACN).   See https://www.careforcrashvictims.com/assets/ACNEvaluation.pdf
In 2001, NHTSA published a paper “Development and Validation of the URGENCY Algorithm to Predict Compelling Injuries”  See  https://www.sae.org/publications/technical-papers/content/2001-06-0051/
In 2001, NHTSA published CIREN Report #1, which I edited, that carried chapters on the continuation of work on crashes, injuries, treatments, and outcomes to reduce deaths and disabilities.  See https://www.careforcrashvictims.com/assets/CIREN1.pdf
In 2003, NHTSA published a paper on the creation of the Atlas and Database of Air Medical Services (ADAMS) to help improve rescue of seriously injured crash victims to get them to definitive (timely and optimal) care at trauma centers.  See http://www.adamsairmed.org/pubs/ITS_SSC.pdf
In 2003, NHTSA published CIREN Report #2, which I edited, that carried chapters on improving care for crash victims at Trauma Centers.  It summarizes much of the work.  See pp.37-45 at https://www.careforcrashvictims.com/assets/CIREN2.pdf
In 2005, NHTSA published a paper by Dr. Champion and the team “New Tools to Reduce Deaths and Disabilities by Improving Emergency Care: Urgency Software, Occult Injury Warnings, and Air Medical Services Database”.  See https://www.careforcrashvictims.com/assets/2005-urgency.pdf
In 2005, another team of researchers I worked with produced a paper “Assessment of Air Medical Coverage Using the Atlas and Database of Air Medical Services and Correlations With Reduced Highway Fatality Rates”.  This paper indicated the life saving potential for the ADAMS GIS by providing the data and software tools needed to enable users to view the air medical resources in this country on national, state, and local levels. See https://www.careforcrashvictims.com/assets/amj-paper-4.pdf

By 2006, under the Bush Administration, NHTSA had reassigned me to work that appeared to me to have less promising life saving potential.  I thought that I should retire and work on improving care for crash victims.

By 2007, GM had funded work at CDC to remove “Rollover and Extrication” from new Triage Guidelines.  See https://www.careforcrashvictims.com/assets/CFCV-MonthlyReport-March2014.pdf

By 2009, Dr. Champion had a paper published in the Journal of Trauma noting the importance of “Rollover and Extrication” in Triage Guidelines.  See https://www.careforcrashvictims.com/assets/rollover_paper.pdf

By 2009, BMW had shown what was possible with Automatic Crash Notification, URGENCY software, and communications with trauma centers and air medical services.  Watch video at  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A30fi8-muk4

2010’s – By 2010 the U.S. had lost 3.5 Million Lives to Vehicle Violence

By 2015, the NHTSA data showed that both the number and percent of fatalities counted by NHTSA that died pre-hospital exceeded those that died in hospital.  See

JS Final NHTSA Vehicle Deaths GraphData Percentages States 06-15-15-1 2015 at https://www.careforcrashvictims.com/home/urgency In 2015, Dr. Champion’s paper “Time and Place of Death from Automobile Crashes” was published by the Journal of Trauma.  Copy attached.  It shows that time and place of death data continue to support calls for improvements in the triage, transport, and treatment decisions of people seriously injured in crashes.

By 2016, twenty five years later, – and nearly 1 million American lives lost and nearly 4 million serious injuries later – NHTSA still has not published a federal minimum vehicle safety standard FMVSS for ACN, URGENCY software, and communications and dispatch protocols to trauma centers and air medical services when crashes have a high probability of presence of serious injuries.  This despite 100 deaths per day and 400 serious injuries per day in the U.S.A. today.  See

NHTSA has failed the American people.   After 25 years, 56% of all deaths due to vehicle violence still occur without transport to any facility for emergency medical care.  And of the 44% that are taken to “some” facility, not necessarily a trauma center for optimal care, many die for lack of timely and optimal care.

The science and safety technologies have been there for decades.  The needless deaths and suffering continue.

Lou Lombardo

Legal Reader Interview on Whistle Blowing


Legal Reader Interview on Whistle Blowing

October, 2016

Dear Care for Crash Victims Community Members:

Legal Reader’s Jay W. Belle Isle interviewed me via email on the subject of Whistle Blowing for Legal Reader. See http://www.legalreader.com/

This is to thank Jay and Legal Reader and to make the interview available to our community.

The link to the interview is at  http://www.legalreader.com/interview-louis-lombardo-on-whistleblowing-and-vehicle-emissions/

I also wish to thank Claire Nader and the Shafeek Nader Trust for the Community Interest for information on the Joe A. Callaway Award for Civic Courage given to two recent recipients of the Whistle Blower Awards. 

Sincere appreciation, 

Lou Lombardo

 

Senators Markey and Blumenthal Call For NHTSA Standards


Senators Markey and Blumenthal Call For NHTSA Standards

October, 2016

Dear Care for Crash Victims Community Members:
Senators Markey and Blumenthal. “If modern day cars are computers on wheels, we need mandatory standards, not voluntary guidance, to ensure that our vehicles cannot be hacked and lives and information put in danger.

“FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Contact: Giselle Barry (Markey) 202-224-2742

Maria McElwain (Blumenthal) 202-224-6452

Markey, Blumenthal on New Transportation Dept. Auto Cybersecurity Guidance:  It’s A Take-Home Exam for Failing Students

Senators have introduced legislation to protect drivers from auto security, privacy risks

Washington (October 24, 2016) – Senators Edward J. Markey (D-Mass.) and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), members of the Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee, released the following statement today after the Department of Transportation unveiled proposed guidance for improving motor vehicle cybersecurity. In 2015, Senator Markey released the report Tracking & Hacking: Security & Privacy Gaps Put American Drivers at Risk, which detailed major gaps in how auto companies are securing connected features in cars against hackers. For example, only two of the 16 car companies had developed any capability to detect and respond to a hacking attack in real time.

“This new cybersecurity guidance from the Department of Transportation is like giving a take-home exam on the honor code to failing students,” said Senators Markey and Blumenthal. “If modern day cars are computers on wheels, we need mandatory standards, not voluntary guidance, to ensure that our vehicles cannot be hacked and lives and information put in danger. In this new Internet of Things era, we cannot let safety, cybersecurity, and privacy be an afterthought. We must pass our legislation, the SPY Car Act, that puts the protections in place to ensure auto safety and security in the 21st century.”

In July, the Senators introduced the Security and Privacy in Your Car (SPY Car) Act, legislation that would direct the National Highway Traffic and Safety administration and the Federal Trade Commission to establish federal standards to secure our cars and protect drivers’ privacy. The SPY Car Act also establishes a rating system — or “cyber dashboard”— that informs consumers about how well the vehicle protects drivers’ security and privacy beyond those minimum standards.

In August, Senators Markey and Blumenthal called on the Federal Communications Commission to consider taking a number of steps to protect consumers’ safety and privacy as car manufacturers deploy vehicle-2-vehicle and vehicle-2-infrastructure technologies in their automobiles.

###

The NHTSA “guidelines” document (attached) as National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. (2016, October). Cybersecurity best practices for modern vehicles. (Report No. DOT HS 812 333). Washington, DC: Author.

When government fails to do its job setting legal standards – it is creating a lawless society – people suffer and die.

That is the tragic history of “voluntary” standards.  Just one example is the “voluntary” agreement of the 1920s allowing lead in gasoline poisoning people for decades.  See https://www.careforcrashvictims.com/assets/gettheleadout.pdf

Lou Lombardo