Infant Car Seat Study- Retraction?

Just saw this headline on cnn.com

"Consumer Reports has retracted a study that said most infant car seats "failed disastrously" in crashes, The Associated Press reports."

There was no more info yet on it!

Re: Infant Car Seat Study- Retraction?

They probably got "nailed" by the carseat manufacturers.

Re: Infant Car Seat Study- Retraction?

Re: Infant Car Seat Study- Retraction?

Wouldnt change my minds after seeing crash test results!

Re: Infant Car Seat Study- Retraction?

Re: Infant Car Seat Study- Retraction?

The study was sooo poorly done. They should be ashamed of themselves and get into a lot of trouble for causing so much drama.

Re: Infant Car Seat Study- Retraction?

Here is the article from the consumer reports website:

CONSUMER REPORTS WITHDRAWS INFANT CAR SEAT REPORT

Move is made pending additional testing now underway


NEW YORK (Jan. 18) -- Consumer Reports is withdrawing its recent report on infant car seats pending further tests of the performance of those seats in side-impact collisions.

A new report will be published with any necessary revisions as soon as possible after the new tests are complete.

We withdrew the report immediately upon discovering a substantive issue that may have affected the original test results. The issue came to light based on new information received Tuesday night and Wednesday morning from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) concerning the speed at which our side-impact tests were conducted.

The original study, published in the February issue of Consumer Reports, was aimed at discovering how infant seats performed in tests at speeds that match those used in the government’s New Car Assessment Program (NCAP). This program tests most new vehicles in crashes at speeds of 35 mph for frontal impact and 38 mph for side impact. Child safety seats, in contrast, are currently tested only in front-impact crashes at speeds of 30 mph.

Our tests were intended to simulate side crashes at the NCAP speed of 38 mph. The new information raises a question about whether the tests accurately simulated that speed, however, so we are now reviewing our tests and the resulting article.

To those who may have seen the report earlier in print, on the Web, or in broadcasts, we urge you to remember that use of any child seat is safer than no child seat, but to suspend judgment on the merits of individual products until the new testing has been completed and the report re-published.

We appreciate that manufacturers and particularly NHTSA are engaging directly with us on this article, and we applaud NHTSA for giving serious consideration to development of side-impact child seat tests. Consumer Reports has long advocated adoption of such tests, since government data shows that side crashes account for a significant number of child fatalities.

We look forward to re-issuing guidance on child-seat safety as soon as possible.

Re: Infant Car Seat Study- Retraction?

So the tests were conducted at higher speeds... it still means that those car seats failed.... Not all accidents occur at 30-35 mph.

Re: Infant Car Seat Study- Retraction?

Re: Infant Car Seat Study- Retraction?

Re: Infant Car Seat Study- Retraction?

Re: Infant Car Seat Study- Retraction?

The main problem with the study is that the dumby was larger then a child should be in an infant CS and the study was only done with the Latch System.

Re: Infant Car Seat Study- Retraction?

Re: Infant Car Seat Study- Retraction?

In their February 2007 issue, Consumer Reports (CR) made some controversial claims regarding the safety of infant seats. In the issue, they tested 12 infant seats in rigorous front and side impact tests and came to the conclusion that only 2 provided good protection overall, while 6 provided good protection when installed with a seat belt.


Federal guidelines (FMVSS 213) mandate that manufacturers perform a 30 mph frontal crash test on their car seats to assure the safety of the seats. This is a very severe crash that is worse than 98% of crashes in the U.S. A rear-facing car seat is installed on a standardized flat bench seat using a lap-only belt or the lower LATCH anchors; there is no lateral (side impact) test done. Rear-facing car seats are allowed to rotate down to the floor no more than 70 degrees. CR tested these seats using a frontal crash test of 35 mph and a lateral crash test of 38 mph. The test that CR put the car seats through is how new cars are tested; car seats are not designed to perform to this type of crash.


But running car seat crash tests that car seats are not designed for is only going to prove that car seats designed to withstand a 30 mph frontal impact may fail a test at a higher speed. If these seats were really that bad at keeping our infants safe, we'd be hearing about it far more often than we do. Crash investigators I talk to on a regular basis don't talk about car seats failing; what I hear about is misuse and failure to use a car seat at all. Let's deal with the more important issues of misuse and failure to use car seats first. Yes, we should get seats like the Dorel Eddie Bauer Comfort infant seat off the market, but we can prevent more deaths by making sure seats are installed correctly and children are buckled up in the seats correctly in the first place.


CR is a generalist magazine dealing with generalities. They test and report on everything from ice cream flavors to Medicare packages. It’s similar to seeing a general practitioner when you have a brain tumor. When you need specific information, you should see the expert in the field, not a generalist. CR may be able to find the basics of the issues, but to truly learn about car seats, you should consult a good child passenger safety technician. CR’s circle ratings system is an excellent example of this generalizing: the circles show a range within their scoring system, but don’t show a specific score (for example, 98 out of 100) or explain how they determined the score. CR often will say that a seat fails one of their tests, but doesn’t give specifics on why the seat fails the test. In the February 2007 issue, 8 infant seats failed their LATCH test. How did they fail? Did they over-rotate? Did the LATCH belts snap? CR doesn’t say. The magazine is also secretive in its testing procedures. It won’t share where it conducted the tests, doesn’t disclose pictures of the setup of the car seats on the bench or when the children/dummies are being buckled in, and sometimes rate models of seats that are difficult to find or are no longer on the market. Even if they are right that some seats have safety issues, how can those issues be addressed by manufacturers or technicians if so little is known about CR’s tests?


Past CR car seat reports have recommended the Evenflo Titan as a “Best Buy” in May 2005. Many parents ran out to buy the Titan (a discontinued seat), but found it so difficult to adjust the harness that they ended up throwing it away. Other highly rated seats from the July 2001 issue? The Century 1000 STE and Century 2000 STE. The problem with those seats? Those convertibles only rear-faced to 22 lbs., just 2 lbs. more than infant seat weight limits at that time, the rear-facing belt path was over the child’s thighs, and the 2000 STE was a T-shield harness system instead of a 5-point harness, which is considered safest by child passenger safety technicians. The top picks from 2001, the Fisher Price Safe Embrace and Safe Embrace II, were discontinued and difficult to find. How can a reputable magazine recommend discontinued car seats or seats that are so difficult to adjust on a child that parents want to throw them away? Yes, they may test safely in a secret lab, but how safe is it if the harness is kept loose all the time because it can’t be adjusted on a daily basis? CR says in their car issues that they test drive the vehicles they rate. It gives them a good feel for how the vehicles perform in a variety of settings. Do they give car seats a trial? No. It certainly would give them a feel for how the seats perform on a daily basis. I’m positive the reviewers would form a different opinion if they had to use the seats on a regular basis for a week.


These reports never take into account important considerations like top harness slot height for forward-facing seats, bottom harness slot height for infant seats, weight limits (both lower for infant seats and upper for the higher weight harnessed seats), how easy the seat is to install, and so on. LATCH was supposed to make it easier for parents to install their car seats, but instead it has created many more problems. Built-in lockoffs have helped reduce the number of installation problems by eliminating the need for a locking clip. That wasn’t something CR overtly addressed, but it does profoundly affect safety when the seat is properly installed.


That’s not to say the magazine reports are all bad. In the past, they've found problems with car seats that have led to recalls. Perhaps they’ve found a couple this time with the Evenflo Discovery and Dorel Comfort infant seats (though technicians have complained about the Dorel Comfort infant seat since it hit the market). CR has brought attention to the need for side impact testing and has made parents aware that there’s more to car seat safety other than just sticking their child into a fabric-covered plastic shell and going along on their merry way. They’ve made public the problems with the LATCH system; that it’s not the panacea due to the lobbying of manufacturers turning rigid LATCH into the belt-type LATCH that most seats have now. Indirectly, CR has brought attention to the fact that some manufacturers do a poor job of labeling their seats. Since news of the February report was released on Thursday, January 4, I’ve received emails and have seen posts on bulletin boards from parents confused about which seat they have. The parents range from those with older toddlers in convertible seats with Eddie Bauer covers who thought they might have the Eddie Bauer Comfort seat listed in the article, to parents with Evenflo seats who had a travel system, but didn’t know which seat came with the stroller, to parents with a Graco infant seat who didn’t know which seat they had. It shouldn’t be this hard.


Even though CR has now retracted their findings on infant seats, they still have to hold themselves to high standards. Readers are looking to them for advice and they just aren't the experts in this field. They must have proper methodology that can be replicated by others. Any high school science student learns that in class. CR would do everyone a favor if they'd work with CPS techs to get misuse rates down and kids buckled in correctly instead of creating these fabulous tests that smash seats at tremendous speeds.


If you want to keep your child safe, you will keep him/her rear-facing for as long as possible. Also, your car seats are safe if

They meet current federal guidelines (that is, if you bought them new and they aren't under recall);
You install them with less than 1" of movement when you tug at the belt path (rear-facing seats will move more the further away from the belt path you get);
The harness is snug as a hug on your child;
You read the car seat instructions AND your vehicle instructions;
You keep your child rear-facing past age 1 AND 20 lbs.; the newest recommendation is to rear-face to the weight limits of the convertible seat or until your child’s head is within 1” of the top of the convertible car seat;
Your child hasn't outgrown the car seat (read the labels);
You aren't using LATCH in the middle position unless your vehicle manual specifically says you can; and
You tether any forward-facing seat.

Re: Infant Car Seat Study- Retraction?

BUMP

Re: Infant Car Seat Study- Retraction?

The study was done all wrong. It basically nullifies everything it claimed so I don't see how it can still hold any truth for people to believe in. Let's see what their NEW results will reveal.

Re: Infant Car Seat Study- Retraction?

I still don't want a seat that fails at 70mp because I can't control a crash. I want the car seat to stay in place at any speed.

Re: Infant Car Seat Study- Retraction?