Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

The CDC is Studying the Rise in Electric Scooter Injuries For the First Time as Startups Expand To More Cities (cnbc.com)

Posted by msmash on from the about-time dept.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) is examining the rise of injuries related to shareable electric scooters. From a report: "We want to identify the risk factors for those who get injured, how severe the injuries are and why they're getting hurt," said Jeff Taylor, manager of the Epidemiology and Disease Surveillance Unit with Austin Public Health. Taylor, who is overseeing the investigation, is working with three CDC epidemiologists to examine severe injuries that occurred in Austin from September to November 2018. He said both agencies have completed collecting data and are currently in the process of summarizing various reports. "There's a perception that scooter-related injuries occur at night. Well that's not true," Taylor said. "Our study will show they occur during all times of the day. People may also perceive there's typically a car involved. But our study finds most of the time the rider may hit a bump in the road or they simply lose their balance."

77 comments

  1. Small wheels are crap by drinkypoo · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Scooters have been around a long time but they have only ever been popular in countries where people can't afford vehicles with larger wheels. There's a reason for that, and it should be obvious. The smaller the wheel, the larger every road obstacle seems, and the harder they are to get over. In recent years, bicycle wheels have gotten bigger because of this factor.

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    1. Re:Small wheels are crap by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They are talking electric scooters similiar to Razor, not gas powered ones like Vespa.

    2. Re: Small wheels are crap by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Even worse

    3. Re:Small wheels are crap by JimSadler · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Some people are slow learners when it comes to scooters and even on brands like Vespa which have had gasoline engines for 70 years or so will have new riders flop over sideways at times. It is a balance and perception problem and has nothing to do with the scooters themselves. The larger wheels seen on bicycles is a myth. If you look back to the penny farthing bicycles huge wheels and full size wheels have been common. Today we see that sustaining a speed as well as pedal input effort on a touring bike requires large diameter with very narrow tires. Yet mountain bikes do better with a bit smaller and fatter wheels. Small, 20 inch wheels work fine and can be very strong but they are also slow and require more pedal effort at higher speeds. The best answer for new scooter riders is to dress to crash. Hand, elbow and knee protection and quality head gear make all the difference and the least experienced riders need more safety gear.

    4. Re:Small wheels are crap by Solandri · · Score: 1

      Motorcycles have tires about the same diameter as car tires, but have a fatality rate that's nearly 28x worse. The lack of a safety cage protecting the passenger compartment is the primary factor. In a car accident, the car absorbs most of the impact energy. In a motorcycle or scooter or bike accident, you get to absorb most of the impact energy.

      There's also the mass imbalance when a car and scooter collide (basically, the lighter vehicle bounces backwards off the heavier vehicle, resulting in occupants of the lighter vehicle experiencing nearly 2x the acceleration forces). But that can easily be eliminated from the comparison by looking only at single vehicle accidents.

    5. Re:Small wheels are crap by drinkypoo · · Score: 2

      The larger wheels seen on bicycles is a myth.

      No, bicycles really do have bigger wheels, and 29ers really are taking over, especially in MTBs.

      If you look back to the penny farthing bicycles huge wheels and full size wheels have been common.

      If the wheel is too large, then it causes other problems. But bicycle wheels come in a variety of sizes, and the wheels of relatively contemporary bicycles with two identically-sized wheels have been growing in diameter somewhat steadily.

      Yet mountain bikes do better with a bit smaller and fatter wheels. Small, 20 inch wheels work fine and can be very strong but they are also slow and require more pedal effort at higher speeds.

      All bollocks. Small 20 inch wheels are only used on BMX bicycles, and children's bikes, not on adult-sized MTBs.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    6. Re:Small wheels are crap by hazem · · Score: 1

      All bollocks. Small 20 inch wheels are only used on BMX bicycles, and children's bikes, not on adult-sized MTBs.

      They're also pretty popular on folding bikes, which often have 16 or 20 inch wheels.

    7. Re:Small wheels are crap by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      They're also pretty popular on folding bikes, which often have 16 or 20 inch wheels.

      True, although you can get folders with 27s. Also, I've ridden folding bikes, and the smaller wheels absolutely transmit more bumps into your bum.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    8. Re:Small wheels are crap by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The larger wheels seen on bicycles is a myth.

      No, bicycles really do have bigger wheels, and 29ers really are taking over, especially in MTBs.

      If you look back to the penny farthing bicycles huge wheels and full size wheels have been common.

      If the wheel is too large, then it causes other problems. But bicycle wheels come in a variety of sizes, and the wheels of relatively contemporary bicycles with two identically-sized wheels have been growing in diameter somewhat steadily.

      Yet mountain bikes do better with a bit smaller and fatter wheels. Small, 20 inch wheels work fine and can be very strong but they are also slow and require more pedal effort at higher speeds.

      All bollocks. Small 20 inch wheels are only used on BMX bicycles, and children's bikes, not on adult-sized MTBs.

      Bollocks.

      I don't see too many scooters on the trails you'd see MTBs on, and besides, the 29er switchover was what? 20 or 30 years ago now?

      Road bike wheels - if anything - are getting larger. The smaller 650b is all but dead. Everything is 700c.

      (Says the guy who once got 650b tubes delivered by mistake from ProBikeKit and couldn't give them away...)

    9. Re:Small wheels are crap by Whatsisname · · Score: 1

      29ers are the same diameter as 700c wheels which virtually every road bike uses and has been using for decades.

    10. Re:Small wheels are crap by Whatsisname · · Score: 1

      650b is still pretty common and available, though it is really only used by small riders.

    11. Re: Small wheels are crap by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And a lever straight up from the front wheels, forming a pivot point that quickly shifts the centre of gravity in front of these wheels.

    12. Re: Small wheels are crap by houghi · · Score: 1

      Bicicle weels are getting bigger? I have lived in places where bicicles are so common, I hate them. I used to have a bucicle and the wheel size that I see is the same size as on my bike when I bought my C64 as a youngling.

      My sister had a folding bike and that had the same size tire aa the Bromton(sp?) now.

      So no idea what you are talking about.

      --
      Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
    13. Re:Small wheels are crap by hey! · · Score: 1

      Last I checked, scooters are popular in wealthy enclaves of the US, so it's not lack of consumer money that's driving escooter sharing services. The US has expensive public transit too. Scooter sharing solves a "last mile" problem for well-heeled users who don't want to be bothered with the hassles of parking and traffic and can afford to piece together an alternative solution.

      Wheel performance is not a *pure* function of diameter; road surface and speed factor in. The original razor scooters had tiny wheels but because they were pretty much meant to allow you to travel at jogging speeds with walking effort over sidewalks. At 5-6 mph they were fine on tiny but soft wheels, but you could feel every crack in the sidewalk.

      Escooters have larger wheels, but that is negated by the fact that they allow an unskilled rider to hit 15 mph. Because of the speed you're traveling on road surfaces, which are more variable, and because people are using them for last mile commuting they don't have the choice to avoid bad road surfaces. It seems like a potentially dangerous situation to me.

      As for bike wheels, while it's true that mountain bike wheels have become larger, road wheels are actually about the same. A typical beginner bike in the 1980s came with a "27 x 1 1/4" tire, which had a wheel diameter of 2179 cm. That same consumer now would be buying a bike with "700c x 38mm" tires with a wheel diameter of 2192 cm. Yes, that's half an inch larger, but if you
      account for the fact that that tire is inflated to 70-80 psi instead of the old school 95-105 psi, the effective diameter difference is negligible.

      The big change in bike wheel thinking is in tire pressures. Back in the day low volume/high pressure tires were normal because studies showed that produced lower rolling resistance *on the track*. However *later* studies conducted on real-world surfaces showed that a lower pressure tire with a more supple casing produced better results. Modern thinking also takes rider weight into account to produce a consistent contact patch.

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    14. Re:Small wheels are crap by hey! · · Score: 1

      L. A typical beginner bike in the 1980s came with a "27 x 1 1/4" tire, which had a wheel circumference of 2179 cm

      Not diameter. Comes from copying numbers off the table.

      27 x 1.25 tires have a diameter of 693mm; 700x38 have a diameter of 698. With the lower tire pressure they're essentially the same.

      I have bikes with wheel diameters (counting tires) running from 482mm to 803mm. None of the wheel sizes are "crap", they're just different. The small folding bike rides harsh, but it is fun because it's nimble. The giant-wheeled fat bike floats over obstacles and has massive traction.

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    15. Re: Small wheels are crap by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Bicicle weels are getting bigger? [...] So no idea what you are talking about.

      So why, uh, "contribute"? Just trying to make Slashdot grate?

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    16. Re:Small wheels are crap by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      Some people are slow learners when it comes to scooters and even on brands like Vespa which have had gasoline engines for 70 years or so will have new riders flop over sideways at times. It is a balance and perception problem and has nothing to do with the scooters themselves.

      What I have seen on the Vespa style scooters is that the leading link suspension is a bit of a trick for the noobs to get used to. Nice once they do.

      The larger wheels seen on bicycles is a myth.

      It's some pretty basic physics you are arguing against. If the circumference of a tire causes it to not descend completely into a ditch, it's vertical movement is much less than a smaller tire that descends completely into the ditch, then must climb out of the same ditch.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    17. Re:Small wheels are crap by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      These are a different kind of scooter than what you are thinking of. These are more like the kids' scooters of yore: flat surface for standing, tall steering rod, and no seat. The difference is that they also have an electric motor. People "ride" these everywhere: streets, bicycle lanes, sidewalks, regardless of how busy they are, and act entitled to be there and have the right of way. I sometimes doubt they even know how to use the brakes. Motorized vehicles should be banned on sidewalks. Especially when driven by inexperienced riders.

    18. Re:Small wheels are crap by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Last I checked, scooters are popular in wealthy enclaves of the US,

      Scooters are popular in highly population dense areas of the US, where they may make some sense in spite of their deficiencies, because all the other options are either fully utilized or not really options due to complications.

      while it's true that mountain bike wheels have become larger, road wheels are actually about the same.

      Just wait a bit, they'll follow along. Changes come slowly in bicycles because they are perceived as old tech, which is not altogether incorrect — old doesn't mean bad. Chains have awesomely low resistance since only loaded links have full friction. But people who are into older technologies often resist change. Look how long it took for 29ers to become common! Not all change is positive, mind you. Hydraulic brakes are a boondoggle, IMO. You're better off using motorcycle cables and not having to screw with brake fluid, plus the hydraulic brakes are heavier. Disc brakes, on the other hand, are grrrreat.

      A typical beginner bike in the 1980s came with a "27 x 1 1/4" tire,

      A typical beginner bike in the 1970s had smaller wheels, though. I used to have a Schwinn with a banana seat which had 24s.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  2. Ya, well ... by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 2

    "We want to identify the risk factors for those who get injured, ...

    I'd start with Newton's 3 Laws of Motion and Gravity (The force, not the film -- though I imagine her injuries and the orbital destruction would have been way worse had Dr. Ryan Stone been also riding an electric scooter...)

    --
    It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
    1. Re:Ya, well ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "We want to identify the risk factors for those who get injured, ...

      Stupidity. The only thing in the universe more abundant than hydrogen.

    2. Re:Ya, well ... by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 1

      "We want to identify the risk factors for those who get injured, ...

      I'd start with Newton's 3 Laws of Motion and Gravity (The force, not the film -- though I imagine her injuries and the orbital destruction would have been way worse had Dr. Ryan Stone been also riding an electric scooter...)

      I'd like to follow-up with a note that something very similar was an underlying premise in the film Battlestar Galactica: Razor -- it's, obviously, very subtle ...

      --
      It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
  3. "accidents" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I blame trump and the trump crime family.

    I'm not kidding.

  4. Why the CDC? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This seems like something that would fall under the realm of the NTSB. What could the CDC do about it even if anything is found? They don't set policy.

    1. Re:Why the CDC? by rudy_wayne · · Score: 2

      As long as people are only hurting themselves and not hurting others, then there is no problem.

      You can't fix (or prevent) stupid.

    2. Re: Why the CDC? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I lean libertarian. So I'm agreeing with you. As long as folks cracking bones don't cause a hit on my insurance.

  5. Why is the CDC investigfating this? by SeaFox · · Score: 2

    This seems to be be something the Consumer Product Safety Council should be doing instead.

    1. Re:Why is the CDC investigfating this? by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 1

      Because these scooters are a disease?

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    2. Re:Why is the CDC investigfating this? by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      This seems to be be something the Consumer Product Safety Council should be doing instead.

      Trump nerfed the CPSC.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    3. Re:Why is the CDC investigfating this? by mysidia · · Score: 4, Interesting

      The CDC is a Public Health Agency, and their mission includes the prevention of injury and disability as well; the CDC are also involved in addressing public health concerns related to environmental health, occupational safety, health promotion, and injury prevention.
      For example, they provide information about Obesity and Diabetes, even though these are not considered infectious disease.

    4. Re:Why is the CDC investigfating this? by mysidia · · Score: 2

      gun deaths are a disease as well, in some sense --- although there is a federal law prohibiting the CDC's researchers from publishing in support of gun control.

      And there's some research noting

      the "mere presence of a gun in a home increased the risk of a firearm-related death by 2.7 percent, and suicide fivefold

      In response to research outcomes the NRA didn't like? In response, the NRA launched a "campaign to shut down the (CDC's) Injury Center."

    5. Re:Why is the CDC investigfating this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      gun deaths are a disease as well, in some sense --- although there is a federal law prohibiting the CDC's researchers from publishing in support of gun control.

      And there's some research noting

      the "mere presence of a gun in a home increased the risk of a firearm-related death by 2.7 percent, and suicide fivefold

      In response to research outcomes the NRA didn't like? In response, the NRA launched a "campaign to shut down the (CDC's) Injury Center."

      Got the balls to split out gun deaths from inner cities?

      And then figure out the rates?

    6. Re: Why is the CDC investigfating this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Interesting

      Ahh statistics. 100 percent of everyone being born is going to die. Life is a disease that we need a government agency to protect us from. Also if you are black you are 12 percent more likely to commit a crime, be a victim of a crime or have high blood pressure. Clearly being black is a disease the CDC needs to protect us from. Also people with low windshield washer fluid are 9.3 percent more likely to have serious automotive problems. We need a 3 letter government agency to protect us from the disease of low windshield washer fluid.

      Hooray for science, statistics and goverment agencies that protect us from real life and thinking.

      In this world there are two diametrically opposed world views. On one side there are the Fascistic Communist. On the other side there are the Communist Fascists. All good people should choose to join the side of the Fascistic Communist in our eternal righteous struggle against the evil Communist Fascists, who believe the opposite of everything good people think.

      Become a Fascist Communist and beat up Communist Fascist today! It is fun, gives youe life meaning and the right thing to do.

    7. Re: Why is the CDC investigfating this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Gun deaths are NOT a disease, they are not cause by viruses or bacteria or toxins. If CDC would spend its money following actual diseases, maybe we could make progress against illnesses that are actually their job to work on, rather than leaving patients unhelped.

      https://www.cbsnews.com/news/symptoms-of-mysterious-polio-like-illness-accute-flaccid-myelitis-parents-should-watch-out-for/

    8. Re: Why is the CDC investigfating this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      CDC stands for Center for Disease Control. They were not founded as a generic public health agency, they were created for research and tracking on infectious disease as a check against pandemic outbreaks.

    9. Re: Why is the CDC investigfating this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      CDC redefining its own mission to include such things means it is not focusing on what it should, Mission creep is mission failure.

    10. Re:Why is the CDC investigfating this? by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      You've already been given the purpose of the CDC, but missing is the fact that the: "CPSC is charged with protecting the public from unreasonable risks of injury or death associated with the use of the thousands of types of consumer products under the agency's jurisdiction"

      Falling off a bike or a scooter is not an unreasonable risk. It's user error during normal use of the device. Now if they were bursting into flames randomly, or electrocuting people as they try to unlock them then yeah the CPSC should definitely be involved.

      But beyond that the CPSC gets involved once the problems are known. The CDC on the other hand are actually tasked with defining the scale and scope of the problem, so barring some obvious faulty manufacturing the CPSC would only get involved after the CDC found something of note.

    11. Re:Why is the CDC investigfating this? by AHuxley · · Score: 1

      They get to look at injury counts and injury prevention not just wet leprosy and resistant TB.

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    12. Re:Why is the CDC investigfating this? by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      Falling off a bike or a scooter is not an unreasonable risk. It's user error during normal use of the device.

      Safety culture disagrees! We must protect everyone from every possible injury!

      I'm surprised in this dodgeball and running during recess banning age, that safety culture hasn't made using these devices illegal for anyone under 18.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    13. Re: Why is the CDC investigfating this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And that is why they fail at dealing with actual infectious disease, like AFM.

    14. Re:Why is the CDC investigfating this? by kenai_alpenglow · · Score: 1

      Just because some govt entity or SJW claims it's a disease doesn't make it so. Guns OR Scooters. Doing so dilutes the definition and the resources to fight REAL diseases.

    15. Re:Why is the CDC investigfating this? by mysidia · · Score: 1

      Just because some govt entity or SJW claims it's a disease doesn't make it so.

      Webster's dictionary defines disease as a condition of the living animal or plant body or of one of its parts
        that impairs normal functioning and is typically manifested by distinguishing signs and symptoms : SICKNESS, MALADY

      In other words, just because mental illness doesn't spread directly from person to person doesn't mean that it is not a disease. Public health problems are within the CDC's purview, and that includes suicides. Public health also includes factors causing injuries to a large number of people --- this is DIFFERENT from product safety: in that product safety are more proactive in looking at possible risks and hazards in consumer products before such product can even possibly become a Public Health issue... the CDC is more concerned about matters that are already becoming Public Health problems, and Occupational matters, which are not even addressed by other agencies ---- The scooters are considered "safe" as a product, they pass product safety standards, but the CDC notices they are becoming a public health issue anyways, and the CDC has a legitimate role in studying the matter. Product safety commissions may later take CDC research findings into account.

      You can look at data from the CDC themself to see that such matters as suicides and depression are major public health issues, and rates continue to get worse and worse. They are suddenly worth studying, and their finding of a five fold increase in suicides based on the mere presence of a gun in a household would certainly seem to make mitigating/reducing guns causing suicides are a legitimate issue for the CDC to pursue.

  6. Hmmm by rmdingler · · Score: 1

    "There's a perception that scooter-related injuries occur at night. Well that's not true," Taylor said. "Our study will show they occur during all times of the day. People may also perceive there's typically a car involved. But our study finds most of the time the rider may hit a bump in the road or they simply lose their balance."

    What we might infer from this, if the claims were slightly less improbable:

    Scooter-related accidents, clearly complicated technical industry terminology, do not occur at night. They simply occur all times of the day. Unfair bumps and unbalanced

    The Society for Flat Earth initiated a press release today about their growing numbers. "Membership is up all over the Globe."

    --
    Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.

    Ernest Hemingway

    1. Re: Hmmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I just laughed so hard milk came out of my nose. Love it

  7. What's the objective? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Maybe they want to bill startups for increased medical expenses?

    1. Re:What's the objective? by Rosco+P.+Coltrane · · Score: 2

      There's an idea.

      I have a feeling you're implying startups should somehow be immune from stringent rules and regulations because that would stifle innovation and new business ideas. Well, when startups' business model consists in filling the streets with dangerous vehicles, I'm all for killing them outright.

      --
      "A door is what a dog is perpetually on the wrong side of" - Ogden Nash
    2. Re:What's the objective? by Narcocide · · Score: 1

      That's more along the lines of how I was thinking. When I started seeing these discarded electric scooter husks littering the sidewalks all over town my first thought was just: "How the fuck is this even legal?"

    3. Re:What's the objective? by Whatsisname · · Score: 1

      Why shouldn't it be? You see people storing their private cars on the streets everywhere you go, yet you probably don't even give that a second thought.

    4. Re:What's the objective? by Narcocide · · Score: 1

      Yea, but if they leave a car up on the sidewalk or leave it at a parking meter but fail to pay for parking, they get towed. That is not an accurate comparison.

  8. study scooters? not guns? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    And yet the CDC is prohibited by Federal Law from investigating the effect of guns....
    Thanks Regan/NRA you make the world such a much more paranoid place.

    1. Re:study scooters? not guns? by Rosco+P.+Coltrane · · Score: 1

      The CDC has conducted numerous studies on lead poisoning.

      --
      "A door is what a dog is perpetually on the wrong side of" - Ogden Nash
    2. Re:study scooters? not guns? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      False. They are prohibited from advocating for gun control, They can study gun violence all they want. And that was passed in 1996 long after Reagan left office.

      So you are a liar.

  9. People riding these should be run over by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Or just straight up shot.

  10. perhaps, maybe... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    there's a reason some jurisdictions require a driver's license to operate them, and many more require a helmet to ride?

    here you have inexperienced dolts riding vehicles they have no practice on, no training on, and literally no clue, riding them as if they were bicycles anywhere they fucking want, without regard to traffic or conditions, instead of operating them like the motor vehicles they are.

    darwin: 1
    morons on scooters: 0

  11. Aiding entropy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm all for hastening entropy. Clothesline them every chance you get.

  12. Will show? by R3d+M3rcury · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Our study will show they occur during all times of the day.

    ...and we’ll keep playing with the numbers until it does.

    I mean, if the CDC is studying this—and that’s not a bad thing—shouldn’t they wait until after the study is completed before telling us what it showed?

    1. Re:Will show? by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      Our study will show they occur during all times of the day.

      ...and we’ll keep playing with the numbers until it does.

      I mean, if the CDC is studying this—and that’s not a bad thing—shouldn’t they wait until after the study is completed before telling us what it showed?

      If I proposed a study with the words: "Our study will show that the sky typically appears blue during the day", would you question it? This is similar, the largest complaints about scooters that typically are shared are that they are a menace during peak hours and that there are many pedestrian related incidents. The fact that scooter incidents occur all times of the day is a foregone conclusion. The only question is, what is the severity and frequency of accidents related to time, and that will come out in the study.

    2. Re:Will show? by ToTheStars · · Score: 1

      Our study will show they occur during all times of the day.

      [S]houldn’t they wait until after the study is completed before telling us what it showed?

      The CDC might not be done with all of their statistical analysis and writing and such, but I think we can trust that they've had enough time and data to have confirmed that scooter injuries occur during the day as well as at night...

  13. CDC can not study gun safety by 140Mandak262Jamuna · · Score: 1

    It is legally prohibited by a special law. It specifically prohibits CDC from collecting any data about guns and related death/injury statistics.

    --
    sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
    1. Re: CDC can not study gun safety by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They also don't collect data about racial crime demographics. If you are going to say a gun in the house increases your likely hood of being shot, you could also say a man in the house increases your chances of being raped, or an African American in the neighborhood increases the likely hood of being robbed. Let's ban all guns, scooters, cars, black people, and men because each of those things shorten life spans, or cause crime. The world will be a very safe and boring place without those things.

      Let's keep the CDC fighting disease rather than percieved social injustice.

  14. Riders can lose their balance? And fall any time? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    We'd better get a government agency involved stat! No matter how many millions of dollars it takes!

  15. CDC should stick to disease control by schwit1 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    This is a transportation or consumer product safety issue.

    What's the matter CDC, not enough work dealing with the current crop of nasty bugs in the world(Flu, Ebola, etc)? You now feel the need stick your noses into areas that are clearly outside the scope of a DISEASE CONTROL agency?

    If you want to be helpful please go after Facebook.

    1. Re:CDC should stick to disease control by thegarbz · · Score: 2

      Sigh. Do all Americans get hung up on names without bothering to even understand what the hell an agency actually does? Is that why governments spend so long coming up with catchy titles for legislation?

      The CDC is your public health agency. Their remit is health, safety and security. Even within the health component they have a vastly wider scope than just diseases. They also tie in closely with OSHA for workplace safety. And the key one here: They *are* your premier research agency into trending of anything that is likely to impact your health, safety or security in any way.

      If you want to be helpful please go after Facebook.

      They already have. The CDC studied addiction to electronic devices a few years ago and noted the impact of social networks, but they are not a regulatory agency. To fix the problem you need to get your legislators involved.

    2. Re:CDC should stick to disease control by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      *autistic screeching*

      Sweet jesus, what the hell is wrong with you

    3. Re:CDC should stick to disease control by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Our agencies tend to go off rails, so we like to keep them tightly contained. In the past these institutions have been co-opted for politics, like when the CDC blantantly pushed out lies about gun deaths. So much so they are now forbidden by from doing gun studies at all.

    4. Re: CDC should stick to disease control by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And here is a good example of where CDC expanding its own mission beyond disease causes it to fail at its core job:

      https://www.cnn.com/2018/11/12/health/cdc-underreported-afm-deaths/index.html

    5. Re: CDC should stick to disease control by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I am not sure what country you are from, but in the US our public health agency is the US Public Health Service under the Department of Health and Human Services. CDC was originally stood up during wartime to fight malaria and to provide a check against the possibility of biological warfare. Its core mandate is infectious disease and yes, still providing scientific resources that would be there if there were a pandemic or biological attack.

      Shifts in CDCs mission are just as unwise as it would be to redirect FEMA to fight illegal immigration as if it were a natural disaster. Both have real missions that are more important, and there are already other parts of government that exist to deal with the ancilliatory issues.

  16. Carelessness - With Video by KalvinB · · Score: 1

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

    Two kids decided to ride one scooter and lost control ending up in front of my car. Fortunately, I managed to dodge them and they hit the side of my car instead of going under it.

    After switching lanes to not run them over, I got hit from behind by another car. Fortunately there was no serious damage and no injuries.

    The rules need to be followed and people who haven't used them before should find a relatively empty parking lot to practice in before hitting the road. "Casual" users are they problem. They have little to no experience because they don't own one of their own. The problem with these companies is thinking anyone can just hop on one and be fine.

    --
    Work Safe Porn
  17. Age of riders? by MobileC · · Score: 1

    How much scooter experience do these people have?

    --

    Fran
    :):):)
    1st 1st Poster of the new Millennium!

  18. As always in these cases by nospam007 · · Score: 2

    Think of it as evolution in action.

  19. Treat electric scooters as motorcycles by knorthern+knight · · Score: 1

    If they're powered by 50-cc gasoline engines you need to
    * be at least 16 years old
    * take a training course
    * pass a motorcycle road test showing that you know how to operate the damn thing

    But replace the 50-cc gasoline engines with batteries, and suddenly a 13-year-old with no training can drive one. Would you allow 13-year-old kids with no training to drive a Tesla, because it's battery-powered and doesn't have a gasoline engine?

    --

    I'm not repeating myself
    I'm an X window user; I'm an ex-Windows user
    1. Re:Treat electric scooters as motorcycles by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      These re not the type of scooters being investigated. These are more like traditional motorless scooters (e.g. no seat) with electric motors. People ride them everywhwere: street, bicycle lane, sidewalk, regardless of crouds. Motorized vehicles like this should at the very least be banned from sidewalks.

    2. Re:Treat electric scooters as motorcycles by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The study is about the Bird/Lyme type scooter which resembles a skateboard, but with 5-inch wheels and a handlebar.
      These typically can only go 15 miles/hour at best.
      Here's a picture from the linked article that you didn't read.
      https://www.cnbc.com/2019/03/08/the-cdc-is-investigating-rise-in-e-scooter-injuries.html

  20. Standing not Seated Scooters by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Amazing how few clearly never RTFA. Theyâ(TM)re talking about electric versions of kick scooters, like a Jump. Not Vespa-style.

  21. Stupidity by Daralantan · · Score: 1

    I know I've already seen people here talking about how you need to solve stupid, not scooters. But this just reminds me of seeing a girl fall off one of these recently. My fiancé and I were on a walk down a path in the city, and this girl nearby got on one and was trying to vape and ride at the same time. She ended up dropping her vape thing, and slowed down, trying to walk backwards to pick it up or something. Instead she kept one foot on the scooter while apparently still pressing whatever made it go forward.... and she just spins and slams into the ground and got hit by the scooter.

    Her vaping thing also broke into a few pieces. Seems almost like a solution rather than a problem!

  22. Center for Dumbass Control by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There's no way the CDC would investigate scooter accidents unless it's for some disease related incident they're investigating. You don't bring in the CDC for scooter safety. CDC is a part of health and human services. Human internal health has nothing to do with scooters. Physical product safety and accidents fall under CPSC's role. We might hear about it next week if there is an outbreak related to "people losing their balance" as one can only assume it has something to do with equilibrium if there is actually an issue. Are scooters the vector for giving people ear infections from some horrible manufacturing chemical or perhaps a sick worker in the assembly plant? That would involve the CDC yes. The fact that the CDC is involved in this at all is either alarming or a joke that they will quickly shelve and move onto more urgent matters they normally deal with, like HIV and Ebola.