BMJ  2005;331:967 (22 October), doi:10.1136/bmj.331.7522.967-a

Letter

Sports utility vehicles and older pedestrians

Attitudes to SUVs and "slam door" rolling stock represent a paradox

The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below.

EDITOR—Recently, I commented on the paradox in attitudes to safety in private and public transport.¹ I suggested that obvious, cheaply implemented safety improvements to private motoring—the example of banning the use of mobile telephones was under discussion—are often greeted with a chorus of protest that they impinge on the "freedom" of the motorist. In contrast, public transport is expected to spend vast sums of money to improve safety, even if the improvement is likely to be marginal. I cited the example of the replacement of "slam door" rolling stock on Britain's railways, which casualty records show will have a minimal effect.

The case of sports utility vehicles (SUVs) represents another expression of this paradox.² It is self evidently obvious that pedestrians will be more damaged by a bigger heavier vehicle that is likely to be travelling faster than, say, a modest hatchback. Yet, one gets very little sense . . . [Full text of this article]

University of Ulster ah.reinhardt-rutland@ulster.ac.uk

CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    What's this?

Relevant Article

Sports utility vehicles and older pedestrians

Ciaran Simms and Desmond O'Neill
BMJ 2005 331: 787-788. [Extract] [Full Text] [PDF]