U
Unregistered
Guest
Okay, I want to apologize in advance because I know that probably most people on this forum are so over it when it comes to having to deal with this guy. I have seen lots of info debunking his statistics. However, there was another part of the Ted Talk (I didn't read the book . . .) that I haven't seen debunked or addressed anywhere and it's still bugging me. I am hoping someone can help me wrestle with this.
I am perceiving a conflict between two things:
1. All car seats are equally safe because they all pass FMVSS standards.
2. Steven Levitt put a 3-year-old dummy in nothing but a seatbelt and it passed the standards.
If the standards are so lenient that a lap-shoulder belt could be deemed safe enough for a 3-year old, then how can all car seats that meet those standards be deemed equally safe?
It doesn't make me want to put my kid in nothing but a seatbelt. It makes me fretful that the threshold for "safe" car seats is set so low that a lap-shoulder belt can pass for a three year old.
There must be something about this that I am missing. Can anyone help?
I am perceiving a conflict between two things:
1. All car seats are equally safe because they all pass FMVSS standards.
2. Steven Levitt put a 3-year-old dummy in nothing but a seatbelt and it passed the standards.
If the standards are so lenient that a lap-shoulder belt could be deemed safe enough for a 3-year old, then how can all car seats that meet those standards be deemed equally safe?
It doesn't make me want to put my kid in nothing but a seatbelt. It makes me fretful that the threshold for "safe" car seats is set so low that a lap-shoulder belt can pass for a three year old.
There must be something about this that I am missing. Can anyone help?