Study: Air bags endanger young teens in front car seat

[Infiniti Z350]

Study: Air bags endanger young teens in front car seat


By Lee Bowman / Scripps Howard News Service


A new study suggests teens are better off staying out of the front seat of air-bag-equipped cars until they're almost old enough to get behind the wheel.

While current federally mandated warning labels in cars flag a risk for air-bag injuries for children 12 and under, researchers at Oregon Health Sciences University found that the injury risk from passenger air bags remains high through age 14.

"Eight years ago, when the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration issued its recommendations, they were based on the best information (about air-bag safety) available at the time," said the author of the new study, Dr. Craig Newgard, an assistant professor of emergency medicine at the university's Center for Policy and Research in Emergency Medicine.

"Those warnings worked in reducing injuries to children, but as a parent and emergency physician, I felt it was time to study whether more children could be at risk and assess whether age or body size were good measurement guidelines," he added.

Motor-vehicle crashes overall remain the leading cause of death for Americans aged 3 to 33, but research on restraint systems and safety for older children has been limited.

In research published Monday in the journal Pediatrics, Newgard looked at what happened to 3,790 children aged 1 month to 18 years who were seated in the right front seat of a vehicle and involved in a crash.

The information came from a nationally representative database of police reports on crashes over an eight-year period maintained by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. The agency reports that more than 150 children through age 11 have died from air-bag injuries as of mid-2004, but information on teens has been sparse.

The study found that children 14 and younger were at high risk for serious injury from air bags when they sat in the front passenger seat during car crashes.

In contrast, air bags had a protective effect for teens aged 15-18. And the study showed that age may be a better indicator of risk from air-bag injury than height or weight.

Newgard and co-author Dr. Roger Lewis, an emergency-medicine researcher at the University of California-Los Angeles, said several body changes that take place during puberty, including muscle mass, bone density and bone-mineral content, may help explain why body size alone isn't a good measurement of risk from the air bags in children.

"Anyone who drives needs to be empowered with this information," said Newgard. "When my 13-year-old nephew wants to sit in the front seat now, I won't let him."

Link: http://www.detnews.com/2005/autosins...uto-205309.htm

[Chris.Todd]

This is a complete tragedy, and sadly one that is primarily a US problem. In Europe, Australia, and other parts of the world airbags are designed to work in conjunction with seat belts. In the US as I understand it, the airbags must be designed to work independent of restraining devices such as seat belts. Therefore airbags in cars in the US are much bigger and have to open much faster than airbags in cars sold in other parts of the world.
The resulting size and ferocity of these safety devices are ironically the cause of so many needless deaths and injuries to our most fragile.

[Kar Krazie]

I cant imagine making your 15 year old sit in the back seat! Thats so stupid. I am big enough to sit in front of the air bag. I am bigger than some adults I know, in height anyways.

[mikest00]

Originally Posted by Chris.Todd

This is a complete tragedy, and sadly one that is primarily a US problem. In Europe, Australia, and other parts of the world airbags are designed to work in conjunction with seat belts. In the US as I understand it, the airbags must be designed to work independent of restraining devices such as seat belts. Therefore airbags in cars in the US are much bigger and have to open much faster than airbags in cars sold in other parts of the world.
The resulting size and ferocity of these safety devices are ironically the cause of so many needless deaths and injuries to our most fragile.

If you read the owners manual (or airbag label) in any GM vehicle it clearly states that airbags and seat belts work together. Airbags are not a substitute for seat belts and that seat belts should be worn at all times. I myself thought this was common sence.....I guess I was wrong.

[jokuvaan]

I have heard also, that airbags in the USA are bigger and more powerfull because of poor seat belt use.

[Taycron]

Originally Posted by jokuvaan

I have heard also, that airbags in the USA are bigger and more powerfull because of poor seat belt use.

That sounds a little farfetched.

[gmhashope]

They may be bigger, but I doubt it would be because of poor seat belt use. I'm 14 and 5'10'' and never really think of sitting in the back seat becuase my muscles aren't fully developed. I think the article is trying to say that death's caused by airbags when teens are over the height and weight specifications is caused by not having fully developed muscles, bone density, ect... but that's just my opinion from reading the article.

[desmo9]

Originally Posted by Taycron

That sounds a little farfetched.

No, it's true. While the manufacturers do want the airbag to be a "Supplemental Restraint System (SRS)", meaning to work with a seatbelt, American (Federal) safety standards require unbelted performance. This was long, and still is, controversial. If the bags were designed to work exclusively with seatbelts, they could be made to work better and better avoid unintended injury to smaller people. However, the stats show that many Americans don't buckle up. This was the case ten years ago, anyway, when the first statutes were in use. If I recall, at that time 80% of occupants were UNbelted. I'm sure the number remains well over 50%.

Rather than letting unbelted occupants pay the price, we optimize the airbag systems for the law-breakers. That's simply the type of culture we have here. You know it and I know it.

[RWD60]

i think this is something of a case by case basis. from what i've seen, read, had happended and would think, the airbag problems have as much to do with the type of crash as anything. when i wrecked my car about 2 years ago, i would have been seriously hurt if i had an airbag, even though i was wearing my seatbelt (as i do 99% of the time). i rearended another car that was stopped while only going like 4 mph (tried to stop, was rainy with bad brakes and tires )... just a minor fender bender which caused me no injury (nor the girl in the car i hit so far as i know), but if my car had been a 93 instead of a 91, i'd have had an airbag go off in my face. i was 17, driving my own car... plenty old enough to sit in the front, but i'd have been injured by an airbag, and quite seriously if i were younger/smaller or unbuckled. at higher speeds, they are better (especially when you're buckled and big enough), but at low speeds they can be dangerous.

[gmhashope]

Rather than letting unbelted occupants pay the price, we optimize the airbag systems for the law-breakers. That's simply the type of culture we have here. You know it and I know it.

Amazing, but true.

[awalbert88]

Originally Posted by jokuvaan

I have heard also, that airbags in the USA are bigger and more powerfull because of poor seat belt use.

That simply is not true. The first generation of air bag systems from Ford (and I believe GM and Chrsyler as well) were designed that way, but since the mid 90's the air bags are deployed based on the seat belt tension. If there is no tension on the belt, the air bag will deploy with maximum force to protect an occupant who is not belted in. Otherwise, the bag rarely deploys like that.

[amsnare]

Originally Posted by gmhashope

I'm 14 and 5'10'' and never really think of sitting in the back seat because my muscles aren't fully developed.

Is this what you tell your parents, gmhashope ??

Do they buy it ??; I do not !!

And I hate sitting in the back seat; its a good place for second class people and grocery bags...

I look forward to the day when all this safety mania dies out , when bags and belts are no longer necessary. I can easily remember the days before bags and belts, maybe things are better now, but at a price...

What few accidents we do have are due to our society's lack of respect for one another...
Think about it for a minute - or a year...

[logansowner]

Clearly children should be banned.


This is retarded, either these airbags are not well designed or this is complete BS.

Seatbelts can be dangerous too, perhaps we should get rid of them too...

At 14 eyars old, I would have laughed at my parents if they told me I had to sit in back because I wasn't old enough to be in the front... lol

I havn't sat in the back since I was probably 7 or 8. The only time I am ever in back now is when we are taking someone somewhere, I always give up teh front to an adult. I don't mind the back that much, but I wont sit there for a retarded reason like this.


The safety nazi's strike again.

[gmhashope]

I hate sitting in the back seat and i do tell my parents that because I'm bigger than both my parents and my sister who's 17 and drives. If it is true about designing air bags for those don't wear seat belts, I say screw them. They break the law then they can suffer the consequences, not make people that do wear their seat belt get injured.

[Erunion]

Originally Posted by logansowner

Clearly children should be banned.


This is retarded, either these airbags are not well designed or this is complete BS.

Seatbelts can be dangerous too, perhaps we should get rid of them too...

At 14 eyars old, I would have laughed at my parents if they told me I had to sit in back because I wasn't old enough to be in the front... lol

I havn't sat in the back since I was probably 7 or 8. The only time I am ever in back now is when we are taking someone somewhere, I always give up teh front to an adult. I don't mind the back that much, but I wont sit there for a retarded reason like this.


The safety nazi's strike again.

You seem young enough to be included in the ban.