Split: Sweden Harness vs. Booster
Sure, some people still believe the earth is flat. There are serious websites devoted to it and lots of unspecified research, too.
Flat earth has nothing to do with it, you know exactly what I mean.
A 5-point harness is great for babies and toddlers.
And I have not said anything else. I've repeatedly said that harnessing is safe and so are boosters. Both are certified and safe. My problem is with people who incorrectly believe difference between booster and harness is HUGE. That leads to bad decisions regarding safety.
It's not a matter of like or dislike. Some people even go a step farther and believe it's safest to be unrestrained. They maintain it's better to be able to quickly escape the vehicle or be thrown from it in a crash.
Nice to hear you're comparing booster use to flat earth and other nut case theories.
There's really no mystery. We would all be safest rear-facing in a 5-point harness, just as infants are. We're all the least safe with no restraint system at all. We're a little safer with a lap belt. Safer yet with a lap/shoulder belt. Even safer front-facing in a 5-point harness
Again, you can believe whatever you want. All I can offer you is something very boring. The researchers who have been doing this the longest, experienced the most, tested seats for 40+ years (with and without harness) and have implemented the best approach to car seat safety disagree with you. They recommend boosters ahead of harnessing mostly large strain on the neck at impact and several other factors as well.
Maybe in Sweden you have a safer fleet of automobiles. Maybe you have better roads and signage. Maybe you have a better educated demographic of drivers. Maybe you have higher seatbelt use rates and lower incidence of impaired distracted driving. Maybe you have a higher rate of correct use for child restraints. Maybe you have a dozen other factors that lead to lower traffic fatality rates
There are many factors which have a large impact on car seat safety except for crash testing which no one seem to care about. We drive roughly the same cars and US roads are probably better than ours. But I agree, there are many other factors. Booster have the benefit of being far cheaper, easier to install, easier to use, easier to move in between cars, kids facing less teasing from peers, and also less confusion. Those may all seem like fluffy factors but in the long run they make a difference.
When you can define the mysterious age range where a 3-point restraint is superior to a 5-point restraint in Sweden and provide at least some concrete research and statistics, then you have some basis to keep bringing it up over and over. Maybe there is a mitigating factor, once you isolate a dozen other variables that you constantly ignore.
It's a subjective debate. There are no tests between harnessing and boosters. Which means there is nothing saying harnessing is better. I know race car drivers use harness together with tons of other safety equipment for their neck, it's not applicable to a 5-year old.
A 5-point harness is great for babies and toddlers. It's also good for adults, as demonstrated by any professional driver. There isn't a magic "in-between" age where a 3-point seatbelt is mysteriously providing better restraint. The tradeoff is for comfort, convenience and having a system that isn't so complex that people will actually use it.
It's completely irrelevant to compare race car drivers and their seats. Those seats are not fastened the same way and forces are completely different. If you spoke to someone with more experience in this area you would understand that a large weakness is something never talked about here (at least I have not seen it). It's what researchers calls "springs". A harnessed seat does dot stop a child as you believe because of the way it's constructed and fastened. There are several "stages" before a child is stopped which leads to dramatically higher forces on a child's body and neck. Researchers often talk about 60 ms. as being the time when a child is stopped during impact. In a harnessed seat, because the way it's fastened and constructed, about half of that time passes without the child even starting to be restrained. That means that crash forces, which were already high from beginning, now are twice as high for a child in a harnessed seat.
A booster does not have as many stages and forces then become much lower. this is just one aspect of the whole discussion, but I never hear anyone mention this important fact. My information comes straight for a friend who has worked basically his whole life in the car seat industry. He has worked for Britax, Graco, etc and been heavily involved in developing and constructing seats. He's American and knows what he's talking about. He also says exactly researchers here (and myself) are saying, harnessing older children is not any safer than boosters but people incorrectly believe so.
Otherwise, it really is no different than Freakonomics. Yeah, it's an opinion to which you are entitled, but it may also be endangering other people's children. As such, it's not going to be tolerated on this forum indefinitely, outside of threads specific to this type of discussion on Swedish practice in the International Forum.
I respectfully disagree. This is not MY opinion. I'm merely communicating what researchers and organizations are are saying. I believe knowledge and learning about how other are keeping kids safest in the world being a good thing. That may be the same to you as saying earth is falt but I respectfully disagree with you.
About endangering children, I don't think you honestly think that's true. I think researchers, organizations, manufacturers, etc over here have proven over the years that they make car seat safety far more of a priority than anyone else.
About this being tolerated on this board, I guess you could censor me but I think you would be doing the wrong thing. Most people have little idea about car seat safety in other places and what's really successful. I (subjectively) think it's a good idea they find out more about how other countries with similar circumstances keep their children safe. If you think that's a bad idea then you could censor me. Anyway, that's entirely up to you.
Now, if you want to say that a booster or lap/shoulder belt can be just as effective as a 5-point harness in some cases, that's great
I've repeatedly said that harnessing is very safe and so is booster use. I've said that researchers here who have the most experience recommend boosters ahead of harnessing.
I don't rationalize that they are just as safe as a child in a 5-point harness or one in a rear-facing seat, though.
Again, it's a subjective opinion. You may believe whatever you want. Bringing rear facing into the discussion is not a good idea since the difference there is so much larger than the harness/booster discussion. An older harnessed child is in my opinion about as safe as one in a booster. I think the difference is small and in the big picture not important.
The problem is that people get all these issues confused and make bad decisions. They turn their child forward facing at 12 months thinking it's a great idea. Then spend two months and countless hours on deciding on booster or harness and another month on the best harnessed seat. That's really bad risk/reward but of course parents don't realize this.
I would be very happy not to ever again have this discussion but I keep seeing so many irrational and incorrect things about harnessing vs. boosters I think it's a good to say something.
danger is suggesting that something is unsafe (or even less safe) on a whim and contrary to prevailing wisdom, with no real supporting evidence at all.
I don't see how you could be saying this is on a "whim'. The views are from researchers who have the most experience and started doing this research far before anyone else. They also have a track record to rely on which is something I don't see anywhere else. Just because US recommendation is for harnessing doesn't make it a great idea. The recommendation has also been to turn kids forward facing at 12/20 for many years. It's fairly recently been changed to suggest rear facing longer although it's a very "soft" suggestion.
I'm out of this discussion. Whatever people choose to believe is fine. Either way, the difference between booster and harness is small. It's far better to focus more on rear facing where the difference in safety is dramatic:twocents:
Have a great week