Major announcement on CBS Early Show on 3/21

[Harmony96]

I just got an email from Joel's Journey that there's going to be a major announcement tomorrow morning on the Early Show. Anyone know anything about that?

 

[jess71903]

I just got the same email! I'm going to guess that it's revised AAP recs. Off to DVR!

 

[Judi]

Gah! I can't DVR!

 

[LISmama810]

Yes, new recommendation: RF until 2

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/chi-ap-us-med-carseats-chil,0,1725962.story

 

[thepote]

Sweet :thumbsup:

 

[Judi]

Took them long enough!

 

[Kac]

How early is the Early Show on? No DVR here but I wanna watch!

 

[Evolily]

We are sure this is an official guideline change, not another article, right? I can't find anything on it outside of the trib.

*crosses fingers*

 

[Mae]

How early is the Early Show on? No DVR here but I wanna watch!

It's from 7am-9am.

 

[christineka]

I know the Today Show was asking for parents who had strong opinions on car seats and available to talk to reporters Friday and Saturday. They didn't contact me (I submitted my info), but I'm guessing they'll be reporting the new change as well.

 

[tjham]

I wish the article didn't flip flop between Rear facing info and booster use. It was kind of confusing to me and I knew what they were talking about!

 

[turtlemama]

My instructors in the course this past week mentioned something about NHTSA doing something to get this info out to the public better, Maybe this is it?
I really hope it is.

 

[bree]

The AAP has some of the new info up at their HealthyChildren.org web page.

Here's the new 2011 info, with the 2 year rear-facing recommendation explicitly stated (here's the 2010 version).

(I think it's great that they changed the age to 2 years and I honestly think that focusing on getting people to RF until 2 is more important than pushing an older age like 3 or 4 for the general public, but I still wish that they had just updated the age from 1 to 2 and otherwise kept the wording from the 2010 version. I know the 2010 version has the 1 year and 20 pound minimum, but the rest of the info is actually much more pro-ERF than the new version. :duck

ETA: Heh, they already took down the 2010 version after I just linked it a few minutes ago and the link now goes to the 2011 product info. In case anyone's interested in seeing a cached version of the 2010 info, here's a link to the Google Cache version. It's awesome that they've removed the old info so quickly, so that parents will just get the new 2 year old RF recommendation when going to the site!

 

[tarabelle]

Hopefully peds will quickly adopt this and leave the 1&20 mantra in the past where it belongs.

 

[SafeDad]

(I think it's great that they changed the age to 2 years and I honestly think that focusing on getting people to RF until 2 is more important than pushing an older age like 3 or 4 for the general public, but I still wish that they had just updated the age from 1 to 2 and otherwise kept the wording from the 2010 version.

Unless they will discuss new data with the article that is being published in Pediatrics, there really is no data in North America to support a policy to keep kids rear-facing beyond 2 years. Theoretically, we know passengers of all ages would be safer rear-facing with appropriate seating, but statistically, it is impossible to say if the difference is significant as kids get older. Plus, even the one study we have from 4 years ago that supports the 2 year minimum had some flaws regarding sample sizes and such.

I hope this recommendation is based on good statistics! Even that won't silence the all the critics, but it will silence those that understand high quality research in peer-reviewed scientific/medical journals!

 

[bree]

Unless they will discuss new data with the article that is being published in Pediatrics, there really is no data in North America to support a policy to keep kids rear-facing beyond 2 years. Theoretically, we know passengers of all ages would be safer rear-facing with appropriate seating, but statistically, it is impossible to say if the difference is significant as kids get older. Plus, even the one study we have from 4 years ago that supports the 2 year minimum had some flaws regarding sample sizes and such.

I hope this recommendation is based on good statistics! Even that won't silence the all the critics, but it will silence those that understand high quality research in peer-reviewed scientific/medical journals!

I just personally preferred the old wording in the 2010 version. :shrug-shoulders: The new wording actually says that 2 year old+ children "should" be forward-facing, whereas the older wording focused more about rear-facing until the weight or height limits of their seats; I just kinda wish they had used the old version, while swapping out 2 years for 1 year, that's all I meant.

ETA: I didn't want to double post right in a row, so I just decide to add to this post that NHTSA has their new recommendations up. Their recommendation is to keep kids 1-3 years old rear-facing as long as possible! Pretty neat, IMO. They also recommend keeping kids 4-7 harnessed as long as possible, which I think is even more interesting than the RF stuff, because I haven't seen an official recommendation from anywhere before to harness as long as that.

 

[Jennifer mom to my 7]

I liked that the person on the today show said at LEAST 2, and not just age 2. THat was the person that was a spokesperson for the AAP and from baby center.

Is it wrong that I was wooting the TV?

 

[Harmony96]

It's about to start right now in Central time (after teasing for the clip ALL morning, lol)

 

[Harmony96]

Gah! They said that infants up to to 2 should be RF, but then turned right around w/ the next of their five recommendations and said that 2+ "should FF."

 

[jess71903]

Overall, I thought it was AWESOME!! That's as close as we've gotten to REALLY pushing ERF EVER! Joel's grandpa was amazing. I just wish they had zoomed out a little on Joel in his MT so you could see where he feet go.