5 points, the Safest avaliable approach....

Corey_Proud_Daddy · Jan 9, 2011

?

I have ran into some shocking arguments that a 3 point system may offer more safety then a 5 point system....I can not begin to fathom how this could be true.

Child Passenger Safety experts agree that the Five-Point Harness is the safest, because it provides the snuggest fit and is suitable for the widest range of children.

Why use a five point harness?

Five-point harnessed car seats offer a much snugger harness fit than a shielded seat. In all five-point harness seats, the straps come down over the shoulders and across the hips to fasten to the buckle that comes up between the legs. The harness sits snugly against the bony parts of the pelvis (the crotch and hip straps) and across the shoulders and rib cage (the shoulder straps). When a child moves forward in the seat, as they would in a crash, the properly tightened harness is already "holding" the child and it immediately restrains them, spreading the crash force out across the strong bones of the body. There is nothing to impact; nothing for the child to suddenly hit. The child does not move before loading the restraint.

CPS

A five-point harness system is designed to make contact with and transfer crash forces over the strongest parts of the body – the hips and shoulders. At BRITAX we understand that children are safer in a five-point harness and that is why we have created seats with internal harness systems that accommodate children up to 85 pounds.

We are not the only ones who understand that a five-point harness is safe – race car drivers and fighter pilots use five-point harness systems for the same reason.

Britax

Jennifer mom to my 7 · Jan 9, 2011

Are you referring to a 3 point lap shoulder belt? compared to a 5 point child restraing harness? I don't think they make 3 point infant seats or child restraints anymore.

If you are comparing booster use with a lap shoulder belt, and a 5 point harness, I am sure many people will be along with the reasons why there is no proof that one is safer than the other when it comes to a child at least 4 years old AND at least 40 pounds, that will sit correctly every time that they are in the vehicle.

ketchupqueen · Jan 9, 2011

Most of us do not say that one is safer than the other for a child large enough, old enough, and MATURE enough to use either one properly. There is simply not enough empirical evidence either way (as in: NO head-to-head comparison studies have been done), and there are logical-seeming arguments on both sides.

The main thing we do know is that the biggest lack of safety for children in America is children not in boosters who should be. Studies done in the last 10 years have shown this several times. I'd rather see a 4-10 year old in a backless booster than nothing. Is it the best choice for every child? No. In fact, I'm of the opinion that a 5 point or a high back booster would both be safer for most 4-7 or 8 year olds (who could fit one properly.) But, when you realize how many 4-10 year olds ride in a seatbelt alone, the argument of which is safEST becomes kind of silly-- we just need to get these kids SAFE, period. It seems to me that advocating for a 5 point harness, which is more expensive and less likely to be accepted by many parents for kids in this age range, in every single case counters this goal. Are there some situations/children for whom one is necessary? Yes. Do I feel that my almost-7 year old is completely appropriately restrained in her high-backed booster? Yes as well. I feel there comes a point where, like rear-facing, the benefits of a 5-point over a booster, if there are any, which we don't empirically know, probably become small enough that it's a completely reasonable choice to make to move to a booster for any number of reasons (child's desire to ride in one, convenience of transfer to another car, child's ability to buckle herself, ability of adults transporting to use the seat properly, and other factors may come into play in this decision.)

Therefore, my stance when educating parents is that for a child old enough, heavy enough, and mature enough to use a booster properly, in a seating position with a lap/shoulder belt, a top-tethered 5 point seat and a high-backed booster are probably equally safe assuming proper use of either one, and the parents should choose the one they are more comfortable with and that fits their child, car, and budget well.

northernmommy · Jan 9, 2011

I have nothing to add to Anne's post, so just :yeahthat:

Corey_Proud_Daddy · Jan 9, 2011

Jennifer mom to my 7 said:
Are you referring to a 3 point lap shoulder belt? compared to a 5 point child restraing harness? I don't think they make 3 point infant seats or child restraints anymore.

If you are comparing booster use with a lap shoulder belt, and a 5 point harness, I am sure many people will be along with the reasons why there is no proof that one is safer than the other when it comes to a child at least 4 years old AND at least 40 pounds, that will sit correctly every time that they are in the vehicle.

Comparing use of a booster to that of a large enough seat to acomidate a larger child using 5 point system.

ketchupqueen said:
Most of us do not say that one is safer than the other for a child large enough, old enough, and MATURE enough to use either one properly. There is simply not enough empirical evidence either way (as in: NO head-to-head comparison studies have been done), and there are logical-seeming arguments on both sides.

The main thing we do know is that the biggest lack of safety for children in America is children not in boosters who should be. Studies done in the last 10 years have shown this several times. I'd rather see a 4-10 year old in a backless booster than nothing. Is it the best choice for every child? No. In fact, I'm of the opinion that a 5 point or a high back booster would both be safer for most 4-7 or 8 year olds (who could fit one properly.) But, when you realize how many 4-10 year olds ride in a seatbelt alone, the argument of which is safEST becomes kind of silly-- we just need to get these kids SAFE, period. It seems to me that advocating for a 5 point harness, which is more expensive and less likely to be accepted by many parents for kids in this age range, in every single case counters this goal. Are there some situations/children for whom one is necessary? Yes. Do I feel that my almost-7 year old is completely appropriately restrained in her high-backed booster? Yes as well. I feel there comes a point where, like rear-facing, the benefits of a 5-point over a booster, if there are any, which we don't empirically know, probably become small enough that it's a completely reasonable choice to make to move to a booster for any number of reasons (child's desire to ride in one, convenience of transfer to another car, child's ability to buckle herself, ability of adults transporting to use the seat properly, and other factors may come into play in this decision.)

Therefore, my stance when educating parents is that for a child old enough, heavy enough, and mature enough to use a booster properly, in a seating position with a lap/shoulder belt, a top-tethered 5 point seat and a high-backed booster are probably equally safe assuming proper use of either one, and the parents should choose the one they are more comfortable with and that fits their child, car, and budget well.

One is safer then the other. 5 points are used across all transportation where there is higher risk for injury, read Formula 1, Fighter Pilots, Rescue Helicopter Pilots, and ON an ON.

Kids are not inherently mature, and I don't care how well the child follows directions, he/she could easily let that shoulder belt slide of the correct position. Consider the long drive after dark where you are focused on the wet rainy road and child falls asleep, then falls out of position. 5 points don't allow near the margin of error.

Anyone, tell me, how, in any way shape or form, how less surface area of retention could possibly be better for energy absorption?

Aurezalia · Jan 9, 2011

No one here is claiming that either a properly used booster OR a properly used 5-pt harness is safer. We ARE refuting your claim that a 5-point harness is better than appropriately aged and sized kids being in a booster. As you were told before, the evidence for your claim simply is not there.

Corey_Proud_Daddy · Jan 9, 2011

Aurezalia said:
No one here is claiming that either a properly used booster OR a properly used 5-pt harness is safer. We ARE refuting your claim that a 5-point harness is better than appropriately aged and sized kids being in a booster. As you were told before, the evidence for your claim simply is not there.

I am asking for proof. None has been given so far.

As it stands, children and adults are SAFER in 5 points.

MissAllyLou · Jan 9, 2011

Corey_Proud_Daddy said:
?

I have ran into some shocking arguments that a 3 point system may offer more safety then a 5 point system....I can not begin to fathom how this could be true.

CPS

Britax

Some of your posts are making me a bit nervous :duck:. Your quote from "CPS" is referencing other harnessed seats, such as 3-points which are mostly phased out, and over-the-head shields which are also mostly phased out (or might even be completely phased out? I honestly can't remember). I don't think it's fair to pull quotes out of context to prove a point... there's absolutely no comparison between a three point seat belt and a three point harness, safety wise.

Your quote from Britax, though it does go towards the point you are trying to make, should be used in context, again... Britax, though a fabulous company who's products I've bought and used time and again, is still a manufacturer of car seats. They have the tallest harnessed seat available on the current market. OF COURSE they say to use a harnessed seat as long as humanly possible. That doesn't mean that having a 50 pound 7-year old in a booster seat is improper or less safe. In fact, no one really knows which is the safeST.

I'm impressed by your passion, honestly. And I'm glad that you are taking steps to make sure your children are as safe as possible. But scare tactics on a safety forum rub me the wrong way, because we all want to be here to help others. Scaring them into doing what one person believes is THE BEST doesn't seem like the best approach to me.

Having said that, there's always room for a little friendly debate in the right places. I believe that car seat chat is the best place for that (Mods please correct me if I have the wrong place!). And as we tell everyone, if you have any questions, please feel free to ask! There are many, many cumulative years of experience on this board and we are ALL interested in helping.

Aurezalia · Jan 9, 2011

Corey_Proud_Daddy said:
Comparing use of a booster to that of a large enough seat to acomidate a larger child using 5 point system.

One is safer then the other. 5 points are used across all transportation where there is higher risk for injury, read Formula 1, Fighter Pilots, Rescue Helicopter Pilots, and ON an ON.

Kids are not inherently mature, and I don't care how well the child follows directions, he/she could easily let that shoulder belt slide of the correct position. Consider the long drive after dark where you are focused on the wet rainy road and child falls asleep, then falls out of position. 5 points don't allow near the margin of error.

Anyone, tell me, how, in any way shape or form, how less surface area of retention could possibly be better for energy absorption?

If you want to argue it - OK!
Race car drivers do use 5-pt harnesses. Good for them! They also use the HANS device so they don't suffer internal decapitation. Car seats do not come with a HANS device. This makes it more than possible for collision forces to cause the child to suffer from internal decapitation - having the head ripped off of the spine. So, it can be argued that a 3-pt seatbelt, that allows the upper body to flex forward more with the stretch of the seatbelt, also reduces those neckloads and is safer in the sense that the risk of internal decapitation is greatly diminished.
There is evidence on both sides of the argument.

Empirical evidence such as "Race car drivers and fighter jet pilots use 5-point harnesses!" is not something that we, as CPST, can or will base our recommendations on. We rely on science, no ifs, and, or buts about it. And there IS NO HARD DATA out there saying that 5-point harnesses are safer.

Corey_Proud_Daddy · Jan 9, 2011

MissAllyLou said:
...

Your quote from Britax, though it does go towards the point you are trying to make, should be used in context, again... Britax, though a fabulous company who's products I've bought and used time and again, is still a manufacturer of car seats. They have the tallest harnessed seat available on the current market. OF COURSE they say to use a harnessed seat as long as humanly possible. That doesn't mean that having a 50 pound 7-year old in a booster seat is improper or less safe. In fact, no one really knows which is the safeST.

...

I want some evidence that the child that can safely fit in a 5 point system should be in a 3 point, high back booster.

Corey_Proud_Daddy · Jan 9, 2011

Aurezalia said:
If you want to argue it - OK!
Race car drivers do use 5-pt harnesses. Good for them! They also use the HANS device so they don't suffer internal decapitation. Car seats do not come with a HANS device. This makes it more than possible for collision forces to cause the child to suffer from internal decapitation - having the head ripped off of the spine. So, it can be argued that a 3-pt seatbelt, that allows the upper body to flex forward more with the stretch of the seatbelt, also reduces those neckloads and is safer in the sense that the risk of internal decapitation is greatly diminished.
There is evidence on both sides of the argument. Empirical evidence such as "Race car drivers and fighter jet pilots use 5-point harnesses!" is not something that we, as CPST, can or will base our recommendations on. We rely on science, no ifs, and, or buts about it. And there IS NO HARD DATA out there saying that 5-point harnesses are safer.[/QUOTED

If there is a risk of decapitation, the force of the crash would be so strong that the child would most likely not survive regardless.

Aurezalia · Jan 9, 2011

Corey_Proud_Daddy said:
If there is a risk of decapitation, the force of the crash would be so strong that the child would most likely not survive regardless.

Can you provide the research and data behind this claim? I'm sure everyone here would be very interested in seeing it.

jess71903 · Jan 9, 2011

Corey_Proud_Daddy said:
I am asking for proof. None has been given so far.

As it stands, children and adults are SAFER in 5 points.

We are saying that there is no proof either way. You are asserting that a harness is safer, based on conjecture. The burden of proof is on you.

There ARE NO studies showing which is safer. NONE. NADA. The fact that race car drivers and pilots wear harnesses does not translate. We are not flying around race tracks at 200mph, nor are we flying fighter jets.

We are saying that a harness MAY be safer. A booster MAY be safer. We just can't say that because we have no evidence either way.

A harness spreads out crash forces over a larger area, and the child is restrained regardless of their abilitiy to sit correctly. BUT, the head is also allowed to move forward as the body is held back putting more strain on the neck. A 3 point seatbelt allows the head to move with the body more. Which is better? We don't know!

Corey_Proud_Daddy · Jan 9, 2011

Aurezalia said:
Can you provide the research and data behind this claim? I'm sure everyone here would be very interested in seeing it.

I'm sure I can not, and need not. It is obvious that you are more interested in your pride then the safety of a child.

bobandjess99 · Jan 9, 2011

specifically, if you are referring to seeing it on this site, i assume what you are referring to seeing is the fact that after an appropriate age, which is at least age 4, a properly used highback booster may or may not be safer thna a 5 point harness. We don't know, there are very few studies. At least one country, which is generally seen as a leader in the field of child safety, has done studies, and has concluded that for those children, a 3 point seatbelt with booster is actually SAFER than a 5 point harness, due to increased neck loads in the 5 point.
The reasoning behind this is simple..in a 3 point lap shoulder belt, one shoulder and the child upper back moves WITH the head and neck, which might decrease forces on the neck/spine, which is what we are trying to protect, after all. In a 5 point harness, with the torso unable to move at all, every bit of the force of the collision is placed upon the neck, and neck alone, and might put more strain on it, and thus increase the chances of damage.
On the reverse, we do have some studies showing that younger, smaller children in boosters (under the age of 5) suffer more injuries in boosters versus harnesses, but mostly to the extremities. Over the age of 5, we have nothing to lead us to believe a properly used booster is not as safe as, or possibly safer than, a properly used 5 point harness.

As KQ touched on, a HUGE part of the problem here in the states is that almost all seats are misused. It is very hard to get data, and there are few comprehensive studies. Also..we've had some crappy seats on the market, especially combination boosters, so it's hard to tell what results would apply in any situation. A study showing kids in boosters suffer more injuries isn't necesarily useful if half the kids in the study were in AOe 3-in-1 boosters, which are hideous and dont position the belt correctly at ALL, if you want to know what the injury odds are for a kid in a properly used TB with great placement. And, the car is always the first line of defense. The kid in a great seat in the 89 ford escort is probably not going to do as well as the kid in the backless booster in the 2010 ody. There are just so very many factors to consider.

And while the racing car driver analogy might *seem* apt, it is not. Race car drivers also wear a device which prevents their heads from flying forward, therefore preventing the type of neck loading we see in persons wearing a 5 point harness withOUT a head restraint device. You can read about the HANS device here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HANS_device

Personally, after much review of the available literature, including some of the Swedish studies, I feel more comfortable with my older child in a booster than a 5 point harness. She is over 6 years old, and over 40 pounds, and sits in a booster without fooling around. I believe the issue of neck loading to be significant, and I have some personal concerns about FF harnessing children. Because I will have the option with my second child, due to the new seats on the market and the fact that he is tiny, I actually plan to go straight from rearfacing to a booster with my son, at around age 5, and avoid the controversial forward facing harnessing issue altogether.

If it is "proof" you want, there ARE Swedish studies, as I said. Contact Adventuredad, and I'm sure he'll be happy to get them to you. i hope you can read swedish.

Starlight · Jan 9, 2011

On the flip side, do you have proof that a harnessed seat is safer than a properly used booster?

eta: gee, I'm slow.

Judi · Jan 9, 2011

Corey_Proud_Daddy said:
If there is a risk of decapitation, the force of the crash would be so strong that the child would most likely not survive regardless.

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q8gU9zzCGA8"]YouTube - Front facing or Rear facing? Car seat safety TRUE STORY crash test videos[/ame]

From here.

http://www.joelsjourney.org/

Corey_Proud_Daddy · Jan 9, 2011

jess71903 said:
...

A harness spreads out crash forces over a larger area, and the child is restrained regardless of their abilitiy to sit correctly. BUT, the head is also allowed to move forward as the body is held back putting more strain on the neck. A 3 point seatbelt allows the head to move with the body more. Which is better? We don't know!

Nice points, thank you.

SafeDad · Jan 9, 2011

Some other recent threads of interest on the topic-

http://www.car-seat.org/showthread.php?t=147836

http://www.car-seat.org/showthread.php?t=147511

A 5-point harness certainly has hypothetical advantages, as has been discussed here in the past. More points of restraint provide better coupling to the vehicle and therefore an increased liklihood that the occupant will gain better advantage of spreading out the crash forces over a longer period of time as the vehicle frame absorbs crash energy.

The main issue is that there is not a body of real world evidence to support this hypothesis in real-world crashes. It may be true. It may not. Why wouldn't it be? Misuse is one potential factor, perhaps one of the main factors that led to claims by Freakonomics authors that seatbelts are just as safe as carseats in general for kids over 2 years old. That claim has been subject of scrutiny, too, but at least in terms of their data from the NHTSA FARS database, their statistics have never been shown to be in error as far as I know. Other statistics or other use of the same source of data have been used to try to refute their claims, of course.

For children above the minimum age and weight ratings (usually 4 years and 40 pounds for boosters), I consider maturity the main issue when deciding when a booster is appropriate. If you have a squirmy kid like my 5 year old who would often be leaning over to poke a sibling or otherwise likely to be out of position, then a 5-point harness is probably the best choice if installed and used correctly. There are a couple of very important "ifs" in that statement.

If you're looking to debate someone who believes that a 3-point system may be superior to a 5-point harness for older kids, you might stop into the International forum and discuss it with Adventuredad. There's a few threads in that forum that may be of interest to you, also.

DahliaRW · Jan 9, 2011

Neck loads are the main reason that people argue the 3 point over 5 point for OLDER children.

There is no evidence that a 3 point belt is safer for a chlid mature enough for a booster (and old enough, heavy enough). Likewise, there is no evidence a 5 point is safer for the same child. There just aren't studies.

Sweden has the best record for children surviving accidents and a low injury rate. They go rfing until 4-6 years and then to boosters. Ffing harnessing is very rare there.

I think your efforts are better spent promoting extended rear facing and the proper use of boosters for older children.

5 points, the Safest avaliable approach....

New member

Well-known member

CPST and ketchup snob

New member

New member

Well-known member

New member

New member

Well-known member

New member

New member

Well-known member

Ambassador

New member

Senior Community Member

Senior Community Member

CPST/Firefighter

New member

CPSDarren - Admin

New member

Car-Seat.Org Facebook Group

Sponsors

Forum statistics