Video (1-3) Shopping Cart Video With Anti-Theft Locking Wheel Device
Video (2-3) Close Up of Shopping Cart Video With Anti-Theft Locking Wheel Device
Video (3-3) Shopping Cart Without Locking Wheel Device Demo
Shopping cart tip-overs are the second most common cause and are responsible for up to one fourth of injuries and almost 40% of shopping cart-related injuries among children younger than two years. Fractures account for 45% of all hospitalizations some result in Traumatic Brain and Spinal Cord injuries. Deaths have occurred from falls from shopping carts and cart tip overs.
Does anyone track the number of Elderly injured by shopping cart that tip-over throwing them to the ground and cause a broken hip? Normally the accident is blamed on the Elderly because they are old is must be their fault.
1. Do the numbers of shopping cart related injuries take into account shopping cart anti-theft devices that lock the wheels of shopping carts?
*Answer: NO! If there had been mandatory safety testing and manufacturing performance standards, many of the attachments made for shopping carts would never have made it to market. When Dr. Russell and Dr. Smith both pediatrician were informed about the locking wheel devices both said as others have they had never heard of them. The reason for this is when a shopping cart flips over most parents only know that their child has been injured and assume blame. More often than not they do not take notice that there may be a locking wheel device on the shopping cart. Their concern is the child who has been injured. There is no requirement in place for official mandatory accident reports, calling the police or record keeping of any kind on shopping cart injuries. These systems are in states all across the country. With no offical reporting program in place it allows the details of accidents to go unreported such as was there a anti-theft system that caused the wheel to lock. and tip the cart over.
2. Are shopping cart ant-theft systems and other attachments regulated or tested by an unbiased third party or made to meet standards?
*Answer: NO! All attachments to shopping carts should be regulated. Twenty one countries have implemented national standards EN1929-1:1998 or AS/NZS 3847.1: 1999. These standards specify requirements for construction, performance, testing and safety. Here in the USA American Society for Testing and Materials voluntary standard F2372-04 established in July 2004 does not adequately address falls and tip-overs. Voluntary standards do not work and never have if they affect profits! The current US standard should be revised to include clear and effective performance criteria for shopping cart anti-theft systems, other attachments and shopping cart designs to increase cart stability to prevent falls from or because of cart tip-overs. If this had already been in place anti-theft system that lock wheels and other cart attachments would have never made to market.
3. The most common anatomic site of injury in children is the head and neck accounting for 74% of shopping cart-related injuries among children younger than 15 years.
4. Another example for comparison. What happens when a Firestone tire blew out on the older Ford Explorer?
*Answer: Often times the Explorer would roll over (flip). If you remember there was a massive recall of Firestone tires because they sometimes would blow out causing the car to become unstable. This is not unlike a shopping cart that tips or flips when a locking wheel, anti-theft device triggers and locks the wheels on a cart. This can happen anywhere in the store, walking across the parking lot or at the perimeter of the parking lot as it is designed to do. The number of people injured due to the Firestone tires mounted on the older Ford Explorer is over 700 and mounting years later. Look at the numbers of shopping cart injuries 24,000 to 28,000 per year or more. What is the total to date? The Ford Pinto design problems caused people to be injured and killed from fires when the cars were rear ended. It is said Ford knew of the problem which would have cost $11.00 per car to correct the problem but determined it would be cheaper to fight, pay for law suits and settlements in the long run.
5. Are there warnings given as required by law, advising the retailer who buys the shopping cart anti-theft devices designed to lock wheels, that these devices may cause their shopping carts to tip or flip over injuring or killing their customers?
6. Are there warning signs on the shopping carts as required by law advising the shopper that there is an anti-theft device that locks the wheels on the shopping cart they are about to use. That this device could cause the shopping cart to tip-over causing serious injuries to their child?
*Answer: There is a sign saying there is a locking wheel device on the cart but it does not speak to the dangers of flip overs!
7. The American Academy of Pediatrics regarding prevention of shopping cart-related injuries can be view in their policy statement. It should be noted that the Academy does not mention Shopping Cart Anti-Theft Systems that lock wheels on shopping carts because they do not know of the existents of these products that have been on the market for over ten years! The question is why?
8. More than 77 children each day=28,000 per year) in addition to the elderly and many others (an unknown number) are being injured and killed in shopping cart related injuries in our country each year! Aside from the human cost, there is also a substantial financial cost that the taxpayer bears. Unreported information: Out of the 28,000 children injured each year, conservatively assume that 5% are catastrophic brain and spinal cord injuries. That comes out to 1,400 children per year. If you conceder the cost of care for each child over his or her lifetime, it could be in the billions of dollars every year. If you take into account this has been going on for at least 31 years because of inaction by Consumer Product Safety Commission (C .P .S .C.)/others), what is the total for unnecessarily medical cost , and this ever increasing cost to our nation’s health care cost. To make madders worse, this figure does not even include the care and treatment of the other 95% of children injured or the ones taken to private care Doctors. If you think these numbers are over stated what number would be acceptable to you?