62 comments Add a comment
My gripe is about the lack of concern for health and safety displayed by the governments. Every week we read of someone (usually a kid) in a fatal accident or being hurt. In the 1960s and 1970s we used to have all these short health and safety public information films on TV and personally I think that the BBC should re-introduce these.
Some of them need only last twenty seconds to make their point, the examples below account for hundreds of lives being cut short every year.
- Swimming pools... surely the unemployed could be drafted in as extra life guards.
- Garden ponds... a toddler may easily fall in and drown in a neighbours pond.
- Rivers...loads of deaths here, usually by swimming or falling in.
- Ice on lakes or rivers... a common cause for concern in the winter, for example 16 men playing football drowned under the ice in Gainsborough a few centuries ago.
- The sea... getting cut off by the tide or drifting out to sea on inflatables, or even being washed into the sea by a freak large wave. Many people have perished in this way.
- House fires... still a major concern, perhaps more smoke alarms needed?
- Unsecured upstairs windows... a couple of kids a year fall out of these.
- Hotel balconies... most package holidaymakers know how to put on a life jacket on a plane, but every year theres a few that dont know to keep away from sky high balconies.
- Driveways... kids in car here please, also OAP's with automatics, put the wife in the car before manoeuvring!
- Garden walls... tell your kids not to climb on them, walls do sometimes fall down and crush limbs.
- Railways... don't go on the track at all!
- Choking... do you know what to do when someone is in this predicament?
- Lightening... five people in the UK each year are struck.
- Cycle helmets... you're mad not to wear one when cycling.
- Air rifles... a couple of boys a year end up in hospital or worse.
- Nasty dogs...don't leave your babies or kids alone with nasty dogs.
- Car ramps... don't go under a jacked up car, use ramps.
- Sledging... any obstacles on the slope? winter warnings should be issued here warning of the dangers.
- Handbrake failure... leave the car in gear as well, many fatalities have occurred because of this.
- Driving distraction... no mobile, texting, or changing CD etc. Should be obvious but isn't to a lot of people it would seem.
- Bonfires and BBQs... no petrol to be used, that's just plain stupid.
- Unsafe furniture... make sure wall units and shelves are secure.
I could go on and on because there are hundreds of dangerous or fatal incidents each year from the above examples, but the governments of the day are only concerned about free carrier bags, wheelie bin inspectors, litter wardens and banning fox hunting etc. They no longer seem to be interested in promoting basic health and safety in this country.
By: Gainsborough lad
Leave a comment
"for example 16 men playing football drowned under the ice in Gainsborough a few centuries ago."
A few centuries ago? So we should have public information films about it now?
I think most people know by now which actions are dangerous. Knowing isn't the problem; the problem is that most people think that they are exceptions and that nothing will happen to them. They are the ones who think they can drive with a burger in one hand, can of drink in the other, mobile phone under their chins and the steering wheel between
their knees.
We don't need public information broadcasts, just a sense of responsibility for our own actions.
25/09/11 Insomniac
A few centuries ago? So we should have public information films about it now?
I think most people know by now which actions are dangerous. Knowing isn't the problem; the problem is that most people think that they are exceptions and that nothing will happen to them. They are the ones who think they can drive with a burger in one hand, can of drink in the other, mobile phone under their chins and the steering wheel between
their knees.
We don't need public information broadcasts, just a sense of responsibility for our own actions.
9
Health ?n? safety is not a joke. It has become, in effect, a killer. It will take more than one rather bland and incoherent report to restore this enfeebled nation to real safety and health.
13/11/10 DSG
5
"If you are the same anon who says anything to provoke an argument you will know what "my beef" is."
I discuss. I provoke nothing. My opinion differs from others' at times. Do you want everyone to agree with you, too?
20/10/10 anon
I discuss. I provoke nothing. My opinion differs from others' at times. Do you want everyone to agree with you, too?
4
If you are the same anon who says anything to provoke an argument you will know what "my beef" is.
If not you are not should consider posting under another name.
20/10/10 grumpyoldwoman
If not you are not should consider posting under another name.
3
"Well, anon seems to have given up when he realised that I know what I'm talking about!"
I'm not sure I contradicted you, did I?
I enquired after your sources and in fact said, "Grumpy, I didn't quibble about your figures (though I'd be interested to see your source) because I didn't dispute them...and because I think that, unlike a lot of other people's, your posts are usually reasonably credible."
So, what's your beef?
20/10/10 anon
I'm not sure I contradicted you, did I?
I enquired after your sources and in fact said, "Grumpy, I didn't quibble about your figures (though I'd be interested to see your source) because I didn't dispute them...and because I think that, unlike a lot of other people's, your posts are usually reasonably credible."
So, what's your beef?
-8
Well, anon seems to have given up when he realised that I know what I'm talking about! If he's the same anon as appears elsewhere I think we all know he will say anything that comes into his head to cause an argument.
G. Lad, yes, you are right; but in those 69 days 600 - 700 also died in accidents in their own homes. As you point out, smoke alarms are very useful, especially in homes where people smoke, have open fires etc..
20/10/10 grumpyoldwoman
G. Lad, yes, you are right; but in those 69 days 600 - 700 also died in accidents in their own homes. As you point out, smoke alarms are very useful, especially in homes where people smoke, have open fires etc..
4
Well maybe accidents in the home should be given a higher profile rather than the constant demonising of drivers!
The number of people who die from accidents in the home was given as 4,000 by the NHS, I had read somewhere a while ago that it was more like 3,000 so gave both figures. I have found the figure of 2222 road deaths in 2009 in various places; today on What Car's website. If you go back several years the figures for deaths on the road is always less.
I very rarely see any of these adverts on road safety that you refer to; the only one I can think of is the one with the little girl lying at the side of the road. I can't remember the figures used in this advert, but I know it was something to do with the driver's speed.
However I can tell you that the figures used in the Think! Speed campaign (possibly where this advert came from) were very out of date. The claim was that a pedestrian hit by a car travelling at 40 mph had an 80% chance of being ki11ed but only a 20% chance of being ki11ed by a car travelling at 30mph.. These figures are from the 1970's; since then cars have improved greatly and the current figures are 31% at 40 mph and 7% at 30 mph..
While it is still true that there is a big difference the figures fail to take into account the fact that a driver will usually have time to brake before the collision and impact speed will therefore be lower. This is from the Road Safety GB website.
So, alot of the figures given by Brake and others are generally lies or "massaged" statistics.
The new 20 mph zones currently being tried out are not a great success, by the way. They don't slow drivers down; they increase complacency among pedestrians who really need to look more before stepping into the road; they also bring speed limits in general into disrepute as they really should be confined to areas around schools at school times.
15/10/10 grumpyoldwoman
The number of people who die from accidents in the home was given as 4,000 by the NHS, I had read somewhere a while ago that it was more like 3,000 so gave both figures. I have found the figure of 2222 road deaths in 2009 in various places; today on What Car's website. If you go back several years the figures for deaths on the road is always less.
I very rarely see any of these adverts on road safety that you refer to; the only one I can think of is the one with the little girl lying at the side of the road. I can't remember the figures used in this advert, but I know it was something to do with the driver's speed.
However I can tell you that the figures used in the Think! Speed campaign (possibly where this advert came from) were very out of date. The claim was that a pedestrian hit by a car travelling at 40 mph had an 80% chance of being ki11ed but only a 20% chance of being ki11ed by a car travelling at 30mph.. These figures are from the 1970's; since then cars have improved greatly and the current figures are 31% at 40 mph and 7% at 30 mph..
While it is still true that there is a big difference the figures fail to take into account the fact that a driver will usually have time to brake before the collision and impact speed will therefore be lower. This is from the Road Safety GB website.
So, alot of the figures given by Brake and others are generally lies or "massaged" statistics.
The new 20 mph zones currently being tried out are not a great success, by the way. They don't slow drivers down; they increase complacency among pedestrians who really need to look more before stepping into the road; they also bring speed limits in general into disrepute as they really should be confined to areas around schools at school times.
-26
"First you say smoking and road accidents are the biggest threats;"
Well admittedly I didn't spell it out but I meant that these are the high profile threats within the public domain, and thus "demand" government intervention.
"then you say that road accidents are a smaller threat than accidents in the home because the films/ads are working."
I didn't say that road accidents are a smaller threat than accidents in the home (you inferred that). I said that road accidents were a lesser threat at the figures you stated than they would be if there were no public safety films/ads keeping them in check. I elided the latter part, in the mistaken belief that my meaning would be credited to me.
Grumpy, I didn't quibble about your figures (though I'd be interested to see your source) because I didn't dispute them...and because I think that, unlike a lot of other people's, your posts are usually reasonably credible.
15/10/10 anon
Well admittedly I didn't spell it out but I meant that these are the high profile threats within the public domain, and thus "demand" government intervention.
"then you say that road accidents are a smaller threat than accidents in the home because the films/ads are working."
I didn't say that road accidents are a smaller threat than accidents in the home (you inferred that). I said that road accidents were a lesser threat at the figures you stated than they would be if there were no public safety films/ads keeping them in check. I elided the latter part, in the mistaken belief that my meaning would be credited to me.
Grumpy, I didn't quibble about your figures (though I'd be interested to see your source) because I didn't dispute them...and because I think that, unlike a lot of other people's, your posts are usually reasonably credible.
0
Make up your mind please anon!
First you say smoking and road accidents are the biggest threats; then you say that road accidents are a smaller threat than accidents in the home because the films/ads are working. Which is it?
Accidents in the home have been killing more people for years. You could have just tried admitting that I was right about the numbers!
15/10/10 grumpyoldwoman
First you say smoking and road accidents are the biggest threats; then you say that road accidents are a smaller threat than accidents in the home because the films/ads are working. Which is it?
Accidents in the home have been killing more people for years. You could have just tried admitting that I was right about the numbers!
-13
"anon, unfortunately you still have no idea what you are talking about."
How do you arrive at this conclusion...and with such hostility?
15/10/10 anon
How do you arrive at this conclusion...and with such hostility?
-6
"Yes grumpy, the road deaths would be much higher without the public safety films/ads."
anon, unfortunately you still have no idea what you are talking about.
15/10/10 grumpyoldwoman
anon, unfortunately you still have no idea what you are talking about.
5
"Actually, anon, in 2009 there were just over 2200 deaths on the roads in Britain, while accidents in the home account for between 3,000 and 4,000 deaths per year."
Yes grumpy, the road deaths would be much higher without the public safety films/ads. Smoking, of course is an addiction so education is less effective with those already addicted.
15/10/10 anon
Yes grumpy, the road deaths would be much higher without the public safety films/ads. Smoking, of course is an addiction so education is less effective with those already addicted.
-5
Actually, anon, in 2009 there were just over 2200 deaths on the roads in Britain, while accidents in the home account for between 3,000 and 4,000 deaths per year.
Smoking related illness is still the biggest killer.
15/10/10 grumpyoldwoman
Smoking related illness is still the biggest killer.
-1
GL, you'll be lucky. Smoking and road accidents are the big threats and so they get the attention. Maybe you could propose an 'Elf and Safety Channel...and watch it on your own.
15/10/10 anon
-1
P