List Archives

Sun, 5 May 2002 14:52:53 EDT

--part1_155.d76ad42.2a06d985_boundary
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

In a message dated 5/5/2002 11:58:38 AM Eastern Daylight Time, 
icivil@xtra.co.nz writes:

> I would not wish to embark on a long semantic debate in this list on
> accident vs crash but just to state that I do believe it is important
> and in NZ trauma providers have made a concerted effort to ensure that
> we recognise the difference between preventable and unpreventable
> events. I know we are making some progress as statements on the news
> such as "A man was injured when the car he was driving lost
> control...."(implying that the car was somehow at fault) are less
> frequent and the terminology "road crash" are used more often

     I have always agreed with Ian's perspective here, as has the IOM in its 
landmark 
> white papers from 1966, 1996, and 1998 on the epidemic of Injury in America, 
> and Reducing the Burden of Injury--these are the papers that esentially 
> defined our current practice of trauma, the reason why Trauma is a distinct 
> discipline and should be considered a disease rather than "accidents", and 
> , above all, the overriding importance of disease prevention over and above 
> treatment, a longstanding fundamental precept of all of medicine.  These 
> papers first emphasized the importance of not thinking of trauma as 
> "accidents", which conveys the impression there is nothing that can be done 
> about its occurrence, relegating it to the hopeless category of only being 
> mangeable by treatment, i.e. no way of preventing it.  With this mindset, 
> we would still be "treating" smallpox, polio, etc.  This is more than 
> semantics--it involves correcting fundamental misperceptions among the 
> public.  Some very compelling evidence of its benefit can be inferred from 
> the significant drop in motor vehicle deaths over the last 4 decades 
> following major national public campaigns that emphasized those factors 
> that can prevent death--seat belts, avoiding drunk driving, motorcycle 
> helmets, etc.  The drop in childhood burns from flammable pajamas is 
> another such success story resulting from public education about 
> prevention--that injury is not a mere "act of God" that we can do nothing 
> about.  Public education is a powerful tool, and it works.  Those who see 
> no value in this "semantic" issue cannot possibly have any experience in  
> or appreciation for the methods and practice of injury prevention--and 
> before going further with your theoretical arguments, and to understand all 
> the evidence in fact existing on this point, may I suggest reading the 
> Institute of Medicine's 1998 book Reducing the Burden of Injury in America? 
>  Then come back to us and make your arguments once more....  www.nap.gov.

ERF

--part1_155.d76ad42.2a06d985_boundary
Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><FONT  COLOR="#0000ff" SIZE=2 FAMILY="SCRIPT" FACE="Comic Sans MS" LANG="0"><B>In a message dated 5/5/2002 11:58:38 AM Eastern Daylight Time, icivil@xtra.co.nz writes:<BR>
<BR>
</FONT><FONT  COLOR="#000000" style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffffff" SIZE=2 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0"></B><BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">I would not wish to embark on a long semantic debate in this list on<BR>
accident vs crash but just to state that I do believe it is important<BR>
and in NZ trauma providers have made a concerted effort to ensure that<BR>
we recognise the difference between preventable and unpreventable<BR>
events. I know we are making some progress as statements on the news<BR>
such as "A man was injured when the car he was driving lost<BR>
control...."(implying that the car was somehow at fault) are less<BR>
frequent and the terminology "road crash" are used more often</FONT><FONT  COLOR="#000000" style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffffff" SIZE=2 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0"></BLOCKQUOTE><BR>
<BR>
</FONT><FONT  COLOR="#0000ff" style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffffff" SIZE=2 FAMILY="SCRIPT" FACE="Comic Sans MS" LANG="0"><B>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; </FONT><FONT  COLOR="#000000" style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffffff" SIZE=2 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0"></B>I have always agreed with Ian's perspective here, as has the IOM in its landmark </FONT><FONT  COLOR="#000000" style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffffff" SIZE=2 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0"><BR>
</FONT><FONT  COLOR="#000000" style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffffff" SIZE=2 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0"><BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">white papers from 1966, 1996, and 1998 on the epidemic of Injury in America, and Reducing the Burden of Injury--these are the papers that esentially defined our current practice of trauma, the reason why Trauma is a distinct discipline and should be considered a disease rather than "accidents", and , above all, the overriding importance of disease prevention over and above treatment, a longstanding fundamental precept of all of medicine.&nbsp; These papers first emphasized the importance of not thinking of trauma as "accidents", which conveys the impression there is nothing that can be done about its occurrence, relegating it to the hopeless category of only being mangeable by treatment, i.e. no way of preventing it.&nbsp; With this mindset, we would still be "treating" smallpox, polio, etc.&nbsp; This is more than semantics--it involves correcting fundamental misperceptions among the public.&nbsp; Some very compelling evidence of its benefit can be inferred from the significant drop in motor vehicle deaths over the last 4 decades following major national public campaigns that emphasized those factors that can prevent death--seat belts, avoiding drunk driving, motorcycle helmets, etc.&nbsp; The drop in childhood burns from flammable pajamas is another such success story resulting from public education about prevention--that injury is not a mere "act of God" that we can do nothing about.&nbsp; Public education is a powerful tool, and it works.&nbsp; Those who see no value in this "semantic" issue cannot possibly have any experience in&nbsp; or appreciation for the methods and practice of injury prevention--and before going further with your theoretical arguments, and to understand all the evidence in fact existing on this point, may I suggest reading the Institute of Medicine's 1998 book Reducing the Burden of Injury in America?&nbsp; Then come back to us and make your arguments once more....&nbsp; www.nap.gov</BLOCKQUOTE>.</FONT><FONT  COLOR="#000000" style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffffff" SIZE=2 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0"><BR>
<BR>
</FONT><FONT  COLOR="#0000ff" style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffffff" SIZE=2 FAMILY="SCRIPT" FACE="Comic Sans MS" LANG="0"><B>ERF</FONT><FONT  COLOR="#000000" style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffffff" SIZE=2 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0"></B><BR>
</FONT></HTML>
--part1_155.d76ad42.2a06d985_boundary--

List Archives

For your convenience, find the Trauma List Archive Below

Changing the Language