How Many EPIRBS and Liferafts Ever Save Lives ?

[estarzinger]

Originally Posted by Cyrus Safdari

you can characertize ANY safety device as a "security blanket"

Yes I am glad you understand and agree with that.

It's the type of behavior that matters.

For instance with ABS it encourages closer tail gating and faster driving in slippery conditions - actions with statistical consequences.

Seatbelts appear to encourage no behavior with a statistical bad result. They are just passive devices.

EPIRBS and life rafts do (proven empirically), like ABS, encourage behavior (abandoning ship too early) with bad results. SO they are more like ABS than like seatbelts.

I should and will hang it up here. I am NOT trying to convince people that my approach is correct for them - its definitely an individual decision. I was trying to support Sven's point that there are practical psychological consequences that we should all understand.

[Cyrus Safdari]

But then the problem is the behaviour not the epirb

[estarzinger]

Originally Posted by Cyrus Safdari

But then the problem is the behaviour not the epirb

Yes, but can YOU separate the two?

Its empirically shown that many people in time of emergency cannot. I know that I personally have had difficulty doing it. I know first hand good experienced people who have had difficulty doing it.

But if you are sure you (And all your crew) can then terrific - I agree it's no problem for you and you can forget the whole notion.

[callmecrazy]

Originally Posted by estarzinger

"Cyrus Safdari;657180] you can characertize ANY safety device as a "security blanket" "

Yes I am glad you understand and agree with that.

It's the type of behavior that matters.

For instance with ABS it encourages closer tail gating and faster driving in slippery conditions - actions with statistical consequences.

Seatbelts appear to encourage no behavior with a statistical bad result. They are just passive devices.

EPIRBS and life rafts do (proven empirically), like ABS, encourage behavior (abandoning ship too early) with bad results. SO they are more like ABS than like seatbelts.

I should and will hang it up here. I am NOT trying to convince people that my approach is correct for them - its definitely an individual decision. I was trying to support Sven's point that there are practical psychological consequences that we should all understand.

I'm quite sure that tailgating and fast driving in slippery conditions are the two most common causes of accidents that just so happen to be accomplished by peolple who have no idea what ABS or anti-lock brakes even are...

The type of people who act irresponsibly will do so regardless of the safety features put in place (by themselves or others).

I used to live by the "seatbelts hurt people" mantra, until one day I was in an accident and split my skull going through the windshield. I have not questioned the efficacy, nor the irrational sense of safety, of seatbelts since...

The key word there is ACCIDENT.

Also the key, is that I had rationalized the value of the seatbelt without ever actually needing one.... It is Stupid. Stupid. Stupid... to think you are going to somehow be more, or less, rational durring a life/death situation based on the availability of the safety gear at hand.

If you are a rational person and you can believe you will act rationally and responsibly in that type of situation, then the advantage of having the "extra" safety gear is obvious.

If you think you can control your behavior by NOT having that gear aboard, you are fooling yourself.

Its been said already. These devices do not prevent accidents, they are put in place to mitigate the consequences and hopefully avert total disaster and loss of life, whether its a stupid mistake or a complete unknown accident is completely irrelevant.

[meyermm]

Really the comment about ABS encourages tailgating is stupid enough said

[SvenG]

Originally Posted by estarzinger

I was trying to support Sven's point that there are practical psychological consequences that we should all understand.

Thanks. It's been an interesting and for the most part surprisingly thoughtful discussion.

The suggestion by Therapy to take a look at Malcom Gladwell's writings turned out to be right on target ("Blink: The Power of Thinking Without Thinking" was the one I picked up and have now almost finished). It doesn't directly talk about the measured increase in tailgating that resulted with the introduction of ABS but it does talk a lot about how our actions are influenced in ways we would never have guessed or expected.

There is definitely an effect but as many have pointed out it is probably close to impossible to calculate the actual end-to-end harm/benefit ratio, but it is almost certainly not zero. There is no point in trying to win the argument either way, it is not a contest. Many facts and valuable points have been brought up and for me that's all I care about.

So, thanks. Now I'll go off and try to figure out what to do with the information.



-Sven

[goboatingnow]

just to out the lie on it

"
WASHINGTON, Feb. 1 /PRNewswire/ -- Today's release of an in-depth study by an independent research firm shows vehicles equipped with four-wheel anti-lock braking systems (ABS) are involved in significantly fewer accidents than vehicles without ABS -- up to 10 percent fewer accidents overall.



"This study confirms the real-world value of anti-lock brakes," said Sam Memmolo, national spokesman for the ABS Education Alliance. "What's most important now is that everyone who drives an ABS-equipped vehicle understands how the system works and how to use it so it becomes an individual, and not just a statistical, advantage."

"


THere has always been in the complete history of safety devices, outlyers who maintain that the existence of the safety device encourages risk taking or in fact actually causes the accidents they are attemting to stop. Its a bit like being told a coat only encourages colds as youll go out in the cold.


Anecdotally and in measured cases, for the minor few who do take an additional risk, 1000s more are saved from injury or death. The statstics on EPIRBS are definitive, and this in a time when huges numbers have taken to the water.


Sven this is one of these existenialist arguments, fun but useless.



Dave

[meyermm]

Oh bugger you mean they EPIRBs were not invented to fleece Sven of his money.

[Catamount]

So my question about the German taxi ABS study -- were the drivers of the taxis that were equipped with ABS told that they had this new system? were they instructed in how it works?

What I'm trying to get at is that if you don't know about the extra safety margin that you have, how can you spend it?

EDIT: further, related to my training and practice post above, did the taxi drivers get actual practical training on their new ABS taxis, or were they just sent out with it?

What I'm trying to get at here is that with good practical training one gets a feel for the limitations of a safety system, not just its advantages.

So who is safer?
a. the sailor without a liferaft who is otherwise clueless
b. the sailor without a liferaft who has given thought to the consequences of being without a liferaft
c. the sailor who is on a boat that has a liferaft, but doesn't realize that the boat has a liferaft
d. the sailor who buys a liferaft believing that makes them safer (but who doesn't get any training in liferaft use)
e. the sailor who has a liferaft and has practical training with liferaft use

[estarzinger]

Originally Posted by callmecrazy

to think you are going to somehow be more, or less, rational durring a life/death situation based on the availability of the safety gear at hand.

Have you been in many situation where your life and the lives of those around you depends on what decision and actions you make in the next few seconds?

The typical human reaction in such situations is NOT rational - its Freeze, Flight or Fight. It comes from deep in the brain and not the logical/rational part. With training and experience you can and do get more rational in such situations, but what you say you will do in such situations while sitting at your computer is often vastly different than what you will actually do.

Let me just paint a situation: Its 2am and you are just coming off watch. Its blowing a gale outside. You are cold and dead tired and just a tiny bit scared by the weather situation and not thinking all that clearly. You go down the companionway steps and as your foot hits the cabin sole it encounters two inches of water over the sole. You are now more scared and still not thinking so clearly. What do you think and do in the next few seconds? You have been trained by the 'safety culture' that if you hit the big button on that epirb a helo will be quickly coming in over the horizon to save your ass (thank you prerequisite!). Can you resist going and hitting that button?

Originally Posted by meyermm

Really the comment about ABS encourages tailgating is stupid enough said

Very helpful comment - actually its not stupid at all. Drives get used to a certain braking distance, when there brakes are 'better' they do in fact reduce that distance.

Originally Posted by goboatingnow

just to out the lie on it
said Sam Memmolo, national spokesman for the ABS Education Alliance.

Oh yea, that a real unbiased and credible source. I will take the statistical insurance data any day - there is no/zero statistically difference between the incident rate of ABS cars vs non and generally no premium reduction for ABS brakes!

Originally Posted by Catamount

So who is safer?

Answer #1: we don't know. But training surely helps. Training in handling extreme emergency situations helps in all regards because the human is typically not so rational in such situations.

Answer #2: Fortuately it does not matter so much because sailing is so safe

Answer #3 it's the wrong question. Safety is not the be all and end all objective. If safety is your be all and end all objective, you should stay home. The question might better be "in which case I get more from the cruising life?"

[goboatingnow]

Oh yea, that a real unbiased and credible source. I will take the statistical insurance data any day - there is no/zero statistically difference between the incident rate of ABS cars vs non and generally no premium reduction for ABS brakes!

Yes that proves my point avnd disproved Sven s point. That safety devices encourage additional risk taking, in this case as you said the addition of a safety device has not led to an increase in risk taking and hence accidents.

In fact study after study has shown that ABS has reduced accidents or the severity of accidents. What insurance companies do has nothing to do with it

Dave

[estarzinger]

Originally Posted by goboatingnow

That safety devices encourage additional risk taking, in this case as you said the addition of a safety device has not led to an increase in risk taking and hence accidents.

Sorry no . . . ABS does in fact reduces the likelihood of accidents in many driving situations. However, people then get used to that and drive more aggressively, which leads to more accidents in the situations where ABS does not help. Those two effects net out - people consume all the extra 'safety'.

In fact study after study has shown that ABS has reduced accidents or the severity of accidents.

Can you please show a study, not sponsored by the "ABS eduction alliance", which demonstrates that? I happen to have seen quite a bit of insurance data that shows that consumers consume the safety benefit of abs with more aggressive driving - and that's what the public German study (linked to above) says.

What insurance companies do has nothing to do with it

Sorry no, they are required by law (in the USA) to base their rates on actuarial history.

.....

[estarzinger]

Originally Posted by SvenG

Thanks. It's been an interesting and for the most part surprisingly thoughtful discussion.

You mods are supposed to keep the peace, not start controversial threads like this

Perhaps you should have asked whether guns on board add to or detract from safety

[Feral Cement]

Originally Posted by meyermm

Oh bugger you mean they EPIRBs were not invented to fleece Sven of his money.

Well, of COURSE they were - that's the primary motive. However, in order to persuade him to part with that many dead presidents, a safety benefit must be used as a lure.

John

PS - I carry all the safety gear I can afford and stow. Accidents do happen.

[SvenG]

Originally Posted by goboatingnow

Sven this is one of these existenialist arguments, fun but useless.

And the original question is supported by (Wikipedia references):

Anti-lock brakes are the subject of some experiments centred around risk compensation theory, which asserts that drivers adapt to the safety benefit of ABS by driving more aggressively. In a Munich study, half a fleet of taxicabs was equipped with anti-lock brakes, while the other half had conventional brake systems. The crash rate was substantially the same for both types of cab, and Wilde concludes this was due to drivers of ABS-equipped cabs taking more risks, assuming that ABS would take care of them, while the non-ABS drivers drove more carefully since ABS would not be there to help in case of a dangerous situation.[14] A similar study was carried out in Oslo, with similar results.[citation needed]

I just found this and was not aware that risk compensation theory was actually a field when I asked the original question.

As for coats, yes their existence has made me go outside at times when I would have stayed indoors without one



-Sven