Jump to: Page Content, Site Navigation, Site Search,
You are seeing this message because your web browser does not support basic web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.
BMJ 2005;331:967 (22 October), doi:10.1136/bmj.331.7522.967
EDITORThe editorial by Simms and O'Neill on sports utility vehicles (SUVs) and older pedestrians contributes some interesting thoughts to a highly emotive subject.1 However, I wish to dispel a mythnot all SUVs are poorly designed for pedestrian safety, and not all non-SUV cars offer better protection than SUVs. For example, the European New Car Assessment Programme (Euro NCAP) reports that the Honda CR-V scored three stars out of a possible four in 2002, one of the highest pedestrian safety scores recorded.2 In contrast, the Audi TT roadster scored no stars in 2003,3 and the Renault Clio one star in 2005.4
In this world of evidence based practice, the perils of generalisation must be avoidedfor example, "The proliferation of sport utility vehicles represents a backwards step in safer vehicle design"and statements be based on fact. Undoubtedly, car design is a factor in pedestrian safety in an impact, but this is not confined to one particular class of vehicle.
John S Watts, locum consultant psychiatrist
Child and Adolescent Mental Health Service, Lenworth Clinic, Ashford, Kent TN24 0QE john.watts{at}ekht.nhs.uk
Read all Rapid Responses