Current seat belt use in the US is at 84%-85%, I wouldn’t call that very high. Much higher in some states, much lower in others. Other high income countries have gotten theirs up to the mid 90’s, it’s possible and effective. The potential number of lives saved is more from the number killed in fatal crashes who were not buckled, and the ability to save about half given the effectiveness of seat belts. The effectiveness measures may change given the crashworthiness of today’s vehicles, more airbags and the like. We shall see.
The literature for the systematic review of sobriety checkpoints can be found on the Community Guide website, along with methods, etc. A scientifically sound process. An update of the review is in the works and the 20% estimate will change, but it isn’t finished yet.
Ann M. Dellinger, PhD, MPH
Epidemiologist & Team Leader
Motor Vehicle Injury Prevention Team
Division of Unintentional Injury Prevention
CDC's Injury Center
From: h+t--friends-bounces@chrispy.net [mailto:h+t--friends-bounces@chrispy.net]
On Behalf Of mbrenman001@comcast.net
Sent: Tuesday, April 03, 2012 11:45 AM
To: TRB Health and Transportation
Subject: Re: [H+T--Friends] A public health approach to preventing injuries and violence: Q&A with Linda Degutis for National Public Health Week
I dunno, some exaggerations in this Q+A. For example, "We could have saved 3,688 more lives in 2009 if everyone had buckled up." The rate of seat belt use in the US is very high.
Trying to get a few remaining percentage points at the tail end would probably take as much energy as the entire previous 90+ percent. Passive systems like multiple air bags, now present in even very inexpensive new cars, are saving many lives. Relying on
seat belts as a solution is kinda old-fashioned. Been there, done that.
Second, "Sobriety checkpoints have been shown to cut alcohol-related crashes and deaths by about 20 percent." I'd want to see the studies on this, and find out what the assumptions and conditions were. If the author means, "If sobriety checkpoints were set
up on every corner in every town in America every night, all night long," well, maybe. But a 20% crash and death savings just from existing sobriety checkpoints? I'd don't believe it. Maybe in one small town on one night with 100% saturation and stopping
all drivers.
It's important in our business to maintain our credibility by not exaggerating what our initiatives can do and by being clear about the limits and conditions of our studies.
Marc Brenman
Social Justice Consultancy
mbrenman001@comcast.net
From: "Eloisa Raynault" <eloisa.raynault@apha.org>
To: h+t--friends@chrispy.net
Sent: Tuesday, April 3, 2012 8:14:41 AM
Subject: [H+T--Friends] A public health approach to preventing injuries and violence: Q&A with Linda Degutis for National Public Health Week
A public health approach to preventing injuries and violence: Q&A with Linda Degutis
As CDC's Injury Center celebrates its 20th anniversary, Linda Degutis, a former APHA president, reflects on the significant advances that have been made in the field of injury and violence prevention and her vision for meeting some of the challenges that lie ahead. Read more at http://www.publichealthnewswire.org/?p=2992
Q: What is the scope of injury and violence? Where does it rank in the context of other public health problems?
Past CDC director Dr. William Foege said, “Throughout history, the two major causes of early death have been infectious disease and injury.” Today, more people ages 1–44 die from injuries than from any other cause, including cancer, HIV or the flu. The toll of injury and violence is unacceptable. Those of us in the injury prevention and research field know that this is a public health issue we are making great strides in, but there are challenges ahead that we must work to address together. Here are a few examples:
We could have saved 3,688 more lives in 2009 if everyone had buckled up.
Sobriety checkpoints have been shown to cut alcohol-related crashes and deaths by about 20 percent.
Q: We commonly hear that injuries are not accidents. Can you give us some examples of what that means?
Those of us in the injury field know that the terms “accident,” “unavoidable” or “random act” are used too often to describe injuries and violence.
It’s not random when a teen consumes alcohol, drives after dark with too many passengers and crashes. It’s not an accident when a new parent is frazzled by a crying baby and shakes the child out of frustration. An elder person falling is often avoidable. We know what puts people at risk.
The field of injury prevention is providing scientific tools to reduce injuries and violence-related injuries. For example, graduated drivers licensing laws, positive parenting programs to help parents better understand and handle stresses, and balance strengthening programs like Tai Chi can help prevent falls among elders.
Q: How important is it for the center to build partnerships in the policy and research it develops?
We value our partners’ contributions to the field of injury and violence prevention. Together, we move proven science-based evidence and research from testing to practice. I believe that marrying science and partnerships does result in policies that provide demonstrable improvements in public health — at the federal, state and local levels and globally. The goal of our partner outreach is to create and maintain partnerships to support these strategies.
Eloisa Raynault | American Public Health Association | 800 I Street, NW, Washington, DC 20001 | Transportation, Health and Equity Program Manager | o: 202-777-2487 | http://www.apha.org/transportation
Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail.
_______________________________________________
H+T--Friends mailing list
H+T--Friends@ryoko.chrispy.net
http://ryoko.chrispy.net/mailman/listinfo/h+t--friends