News and Information

Loss of Control Collision On Windemere West of Doon Drive is Combination of Stupidity, Speed and a Lot of Luck

Last night a group of three males decided to rev up their engine on Windemere Road and a senseless collision resulted. I have no information about the injury condition of the occupants but, given that the collision was not reported in any news media I hopefully assume that the injuries were not significant. But the driver seemed to do everything except dig his own grave. Here are some photos of the accident site that will explain my somewhat insensitive comments.

First, we have a view, below, looking westbound on Windemere just west of the intersection of Doon Drive. The subject vehicle was westbound, the driver loss directional control of his vehicle and began to rotate counter-clockwise, producing some typical yaw marks in the middle of the road.



The construction cones on the north roadside indicate where the vehicle collided with a typical "W" guard rail. Below is an elevated view of the deflection of the barrier, looking westward.


I can only say that they can thank their God, or the city's Transportation Department that this guard rail was of sufficient length, design and strength to re-direct the vehicle otherwise the vehicle would have been plunged into a deep ravine and their injury outcome would have been much worse. Their redirection took them back onto the road where they traveled toward the area where the eastbound car is visible in the background of the above photo. Just behind that eastbound car there is a private driveway which is shown more clearly in the photo below.


The vehicle produced metallic scrapes on the road surface as it came off the barrier and this scraping was visible up to this driveway where the vehicle then struck the curb on both sides of the driveway. The vehicle was then re-directed in a westerly direction and then northerly, back onto the roadway as shown  in the photo below.


In the photo above you should be able to see some of the scrapings on the driveway as well as some of the markings on the grass boulevard just to the west of the driveway. Once the vehicle re-entered the road surface it came to a halt near the centre of the road in the background. The photo below is an eastbound view taken just east of the vehicle's rest position showing the driveway.


The guard rail on the north (left) side of the road is so far away from this rest position that it is likely not possible to see the struck barrier from the above photo. Below is another eastbound view taken from the south driveway and now it should be possible to make out the position of the struck barrier in the background.


While I attempt to avoid the use of insensitive comments due to the serious nature of injuries involved in many of these collisions, this collision should make one stop and wonder just how stupid, yet lucky, these persons were to be blessed with the favourable outcome that occurred. Windemere Road is signed with a maximum speed of 60 km/h. Unlike some the previous articles I'm simply not going to report my calculations of the speed of this vehicle. Look at the site evidence. It extends for several hundred metres. In the previous article I noted the loss of control Neon was travelling about 140 or 150 km/h on the highway. A similar deceleration distance was accomplished in the present collision - but Windemere Road is in the City of London, a built up, urban centre. What can I say.

High Speed Neon Rollover On Oil Heritage Road In Lambton County

It was reported that a Dodge Neon was involved in a rollover collision on Oil Heritage Road, north of Fisher Line in Lambton County this morning, August 27, 2010 just before 0800 hours. The driver of the Neon, Kyle Van Moorsel, 22, was taken away by air ambulance and is listed in critical condition. His passenger, Marc Piquette, 24, suffered non-life-threatening injuries. It was further reported that both occupants were wearing their seat belts and remained in the vehicle. The following photos show the collision site.

The northbound Neon approached a shallow "S" curve in the otherwise straight road and the photo below is a northbound view upon approach to the curve.







The first sign of a problem is visible on the right (east) shoulder where we see a tire mark that has diverged into two marks. Such a marking indicates that the vehicle has commenced rotating counter-clockwise on the shoulder as shown below.


The vehicle then returned to the road surface as noted by the tire marks coming off of the east shoulder below.


While continuing to rotate counter-clockwise the Neon then travelled across the road, while continuing to produce yaw marks as noted below.


The Neon then exited the roadway on the west shoulder and entered bean field on the west roadside as noted below.




Upon travelling through the bean field it had now rotated completely backwards and collided with a culvert as noted in the photo below.


The close-up view below shows the impact damage to the metal culvert and the evidence of the Neon's impact with the embankment around the culvert.



 The impact with the embankment projected the vehicle in the air, causing the vehicle to fly over top of the crops as shown in the photo below.


You should be able to see several "bounces" of the vehicle as it has hop-scotched over top of the crops from one landing to the next. The Neon eventually settled down in the field as shown below.


A westbound view taken from the roadway shows the area of damaged crops at the final rest position of the vehicle. The markings coming toward the road were produced by towing personnel as they brought the Neon out of the ditch.

In analyzing this collision we can estimate the vehicle's speed by examining what decelerations it might have experienced from the first visible tire mark on the east shoulder up to the point where the vehicle came to rest. Thus the Neon rotated on the east shoulder for a distance of about 52 metres. It then travelled across the asphalt road for a distance of about 68 metres. It then travelled through the bean field over a distance of about 86 metres before coming to rest. So, in total the distance of deceleration was at least 206 metres. As a preliminary estimate we can use deceleration levels of 0.3g for the east shoulder, 0.4g for the road and 0.5g for the tumbling in the field. Combining these decelerations over the total travel distance yields an initial speed of about 148 km/h!!! And the investigating police are quoted as saying they do not know what caused the collision.

Well, in fact they may be quite right. The first presumption is to look at the speed itself and walk away. But there is more to the story. Below is another view of the beginning of the tire marks on the east shoulder where the Neon first began its counter-clockwise rotation .This is a southbound view or opposite to the vehicle's travel direction. A carpenter's level has been placed on the shoulder and an angle-finding instrument is resting on top to show the angle of the shoulder.



Below is a close-up view of that angle showing about 7 degrees. That's a pretty steep angle for a shoulder.


 Furthermore, there is evidence that the shoulder had been turned up recently by maintenance personnel thus the gravel would have been softer than normal.

So am I saying the local maintenance personnel should be sued for maintaining a dangerous road? Certainly not. But this is an example of the multiple factors that come into play in collision causation. The first and obvious fact is played out by police and news media as the tremendous speed of the vehicle. And rightly so. But if we had a shoulder that was hard-packed and at a proper angle we might also have prevented the collision - only perhaps (given it tremendous speed) to have the vehicle collide with something further up the road.

I wish the occupants a full recovery although that may be in doubt for the driver. But this must be stated: You cannot travel at close to 150 km/h into a rural curve and not expect drastic consequences. The only thing that kept the occupants alive was that they were held within the vehicle by their seat belts.
 

Cyclist On Hyde Park Rd South of Ilderton In Critical Condition

This morning a 42-year-old female cyclist was reportedly struck from behind by an SUV while travelling southbound on Hyde Park Road just on the southern outskirts of Ilderton, Ontario. Below is a view looking southbound just prior to the suspected area of impact.


The roadway is a downgrade with a limited visibility for the SUV driver however there should have been sufficient viewing distance to observe the cyclist. Evidence from this type of collision is often scarce and the point of impact (POI) is often difficult to detect because the evidence can be so minimal. The existence of bright sunshine (as was the case today) makes such a determination that much more difficult because the sunlight white-washes the road making it very difficult to see roadway markings. It is best  to examine such evidence in the early morning or in the evening when the sun is just rising or setting. A good cloudy day is also helpful.

I cannot be certain buy my best work at finding the point of impact is shown in the photo below.



This is based on the apparent smudging of black, tire-like material on the pavement just to the outside (toward the shoulder) of the white painted line. There is also a disturbance of the gravel near the edge of the asphalt. Because the police would have the advantage of seeing the damage to the vehicle and the pattern of the debris they should be able to confirm whether I am right.

If so then obviously the cyclist was travelling very close to the asphalt edge when she was struck and the SUV would have to have strayed to the right to strike her. Consider this: A typical paved lane is 3.5 metres wide and an SUV might be in the range of 1.8 to 2.0 metres wide. Drivers normally do not travel in the middle of their lane but are usually closer to the centre-line. But if we assume travel in the middle, for this example, then the right side of the SUV should have been more than 0.75 metre away from the road edge. If the cyclist's wheel was 10 centimetres from the road edge then the cyclist would have to be wider than (2 X .65) 1.3 metres in order to be contacted. That is not likely so I think the SUV driver is going to have a problem. Besides, one should go around a cyclist or not pass if there is oncoming traffic that prevents veering out. Of course there can be many unknown issues surrounding this case as is so with all cases.

Unless the police are absolutely sure of their findings they should always return to such an accident site near sunset to confirm that they have seen all the markings that they think are there. Since the collision reportedly occurred near 0730 hours it is possible the police reconstrutionist may have arrived early enough to view the road surface before the sun got too high. But generally, I have to say that police fail to return to the site after the sun is no longer a factor in such situations when they should be doing so. This also happens in situations when a roadway is wet - police should re-attend when the roadway dries to confirm they have got everything they should. It can be surprising how hidden markings can just open up and reveal themselves under proper lighting conditions.

UPDATE: August 26, 2010, 2140 Hours

The cyclist has been identified as Patricia Stacey of Ilderton, Ontario. Her injury status has now been improved from critical to fair. The 42-year-old London man who was the driver of the SUV has been charged with failing to avoid a collision but has not yet been identified.

CAA's Worst Roads Campaign Is Worst For Traffic Safety

The Canadian Automobile Association (CAA) continues to advertise a public participation campaign where the public is encouraged to register a vote regarding which roads in their area are the "worst". CAA's reasoning is that the promotion pressures local politicians to repair those worst roads thereby making the public safer. The issue that is not made clear is exactly how the CAA has determined that road repair priorities that are based on the public's expertise make the public safer. For example, the CAA has posted a list of the worst 14 roads in the City of London, Ontario. Some of the listed comments in August of 2010 are as follows:

Talbot Street: "Extremely heaved from frost...tones of potholes!"

Adelaide Street: "Road missing chunks of concrete and floods horribly"

Wavell: "Potholed and rough enough to shake out your teeth"

Highbury South: "Just repaired and it is in worse shape than before repair"

Highbury South: "Like driving over a old log bridge"

Southdale Road (Between Boler & Westdel Bourne): "...a nightmare - it has steep hills and the road is literally falling apart for two mile stretch...sides of road have been patched but is so rough that more than 40 km/hr you risk being thrown off to the side...very dangerous, especially at night, as it does not have street lights"

Commissioners Rd: "...too many potholes..."

Hamlyn Street: "speed limit is 50 km/h but motorists routinely driver 80 km/h...no sidewalks...road full of potholes and cracks for years making difficult for strollers, wheelchairs & bicycles"

Beaverbrook (Intersection at Wonderland): "..mis-matched lanes that are not properly marked"

All London Roads: "...worst managed system across the board considering high taxes...an outright crime...shame on the people in charge of this mess"

Wharncliffe Rd: "narrow lanes, no room for bikes...lights every 50 feet that are not synchronized"

Oxford St: "...potholes...no bike lanes...heavy traffic"

Wortley Road: ""...veritable pothole and needs to be fixed desperately...impossible for cyclists causing them to ride on sidewalks"

Southdale Road: "potholes"

Bostwick Road: " potholes"

With respect, while the average driver may deem the road he/she drives as "bad" that cannot be the basis upon which decisions to repair/upgrade a roadway should be made. Roadway design, signage and maintenance practices have been developed over many decades and there are very specific guidelines/standards in place across North America. A quick glance at just one relevant website of the Transportation Research Board (TRB) for example, will quickly acquaint the reader with the vast and detailed extent of research and knowledge that exists. But there are numerous associations and research facilities across the world that examine these issues. Although average citizens may not have the time to familiarize themselves with all of this, an association such as the CAA must. Especially if the CAA's influence affects what gets repaired and what remains un-repaired.

In fact, in the local regions of Ontario the Provincial government has a set of guidelines called the Ontario Traffic Manual which discusses a great many of  the guidelines for standardization of roadway design, signage and maintenance. And up until recently the prioritization of what gets repaired, and the reasons for those decisions, were accessible for the public's viewing through provincial government manuals that were available to the public. But no more.

Now-a-days the technical procedures used by municipalities in Ontario to prioritize their roadway improvements are only for their eyes to see. Similarly, the details of motor vehicle accident locations and patterns are also held at close guard by municipalities. Part of the reason is the large monetary struggle that is being waged between insurance companies and their defense lawyers and plaintiff lawyers representing accident victims. Municipalities are faced with a large exposure due to the large numbers of roadways under their jurisdiction and the large numbers of potential accident victims that could blame them for their losses. If an accurate list of roadway deficiencies was available to plaintiff lawyers it would be very easy for them to win large settlements against municipalities. So this game of cat and mouse is played out to the detriment of us all.

This is why citizens who report that one road is worse than another do not have the information, education or data to make a proper assessment.  When they complain about a roadway pothole they do not understand whether that pothole is any more dangerous than the pothole on a neighbouring road. They have no information about how one roadway actually compares to another in their City or how one City compares to another.

This is why the CAA's approach to use the public's lack of knowledge to force various changes to roads is a bad and unsafe idea. If the CAA truly wants to be positive partner on the road to good roads then there are alternative steps that they could follow. The CAA should be promoting the release of technical data by municipalities about the specifics of roadway deficiencies in their jurisdictions and how the Road Works departments in their municipalities have to juggle a multitude of considerations in selecting what is done first, while beating back the influences of politicians who are as uninformed about what procedures need to be followed as the general public. It should not be the loudest voice (squeakiest wheel) that gets the attention. The CAA should be working with other road safety experts to resolve this unproductive game of hide-go-seek between municipalities and their defense lawyers versus the plaintiff lawyers and their clients. The CAA should be promoting the education of police officers at police colleges in Ontario in the technical aspects of roadway design, maintenance and signage so that these police officers can more accurately identify when deficiencies in these areas have contributed to a collision and so that more accurate statistics are collected about the true influence of those deficiencies. And most importantly the CAA should be working with citizens to understand the difference between cosmetically unpleasant road features versus those issues that truly make roads unsafe. I am all for public participation and input but not when the public is blindfolded, ear muffed and given a large stick to strike away, like the proverbial bull in a china shop, without knowing what needs to be struck.

Rollover Collision On Nairn Rd of August 23, 2010 Is Not Typical

By now you will have observed photos from a number of collisions I have described on this website where drivers have lost directional control of their vehicles and rolled over. Inevitably these rollover events are preceded by a yawing-type of tire mark indicating that the vehicle is rotating about its vertical axis. It is rare not to see this type of yawing evidence in a loss-of-control, rollover collision.

I can report that yesterday's collision on Nairn Road, just south of Ilderton Road, north-west of London, Ontario is one of those rarities where pre-crash yaw was not evident.

Below is a photo looking south from just north of the intersection of Ilderton Road. The vehicle left the east roadside at about 76 metres south of the intersection.




Although it is not possible to see in the above photo, the tire marks from the vehicle can be seen adjacent to a sign located on the left (east) side of the road. The photo below takes us just past (south of) the intersection of Ilderton Road and you should now be able to see the road sign on the left (east) side of the road.



It is still not possible to see the tire marks in the above photo. However in the photo below you should now see the road sign fairly clearly on the left (east) side of Nairn Road. And if you look very closely you might be able to see the tire marks just to the right (west) of the sign.


I will assume that the quality of photos showing up on the internet will not be as good as what I can see in the original photos. So here (below) is a closer view of the tire marks.



Hopefully in the above photo you should start to see the tire marks just to the right of the road sign. Note how straight they are. Below is yet a closer view of the tire marks.


In the above photo you should begin to appreciate that the tire marks are very straight and not typical of the curved marks you would expect to see in a "yaw" type of tire mark. The vehicle is essentially plowing forward without rotation. Very atypical.

Some more facts: From the point where the vehicle left the roadway, up to the point where it struck the side of the private driveway was a distance of 51.6 metres. In that total distance the vehicle managed to move laterally a distance of only 4.5 metres. This is a shallow angle. After striking the earth at the driveway the vehicle then tumbled an additional 62 metres to where it came to rest.

Speed calculations can invoke the idea of a "tumble number" for the rollover distance of about 0.5 g. Applying that would yield a speed of about 89 km/h upon leaving the area of the driveway. The 51.6 metres of travel through the grass roadside leading to the driveway could result in a wide variance of decelerations since we cannot be sure of how much, if any, braking action was involved. Note that just because there is no evidence of "skidding" does not mean that there was an absence of braking. Let's assume a deceleration value of .15 g over that distance and combine that with the previous speed calculation. This would result in an exit speed from the roadway of about 99.4 km/h. Certainly not unusual.

But why did the vehicle leave the road? This is one of those things that cannot be solved just from looking at the scene evidence. We can only say that the scene evidence is not typical. However, given that the vehicle left the roadway only about 76 metres from an intersection might lead one to consider whether there was some interference from cross traffic that led the driver to take evasive action. Just one of many possibilities.





(To be continued shortly)

Fatal Fire-Fighters Bus Collision on Hwy 401 & 403 on August 22, 2010

The latest twist of fate has involved a peculiar set of circumstances whereby a group of fire-fighters from Napanee, Ontario travelled to Windsor for a competition only to be involved in a collision near Woodstock, Ontario and being sent back to a London Hospital. Concerned relatives for the injured parties chartered a bus to visit these fire-fighters but on the return trip home that bus itself was involved a fatal collision, also near Woodstock, Ontario.

None of these circumstances are ever easy to report. Unfortunately, in the second collision involving the bus, the wife of one of the injured fire-fighters, Darlene Goodfellow, 49, sustained fatal injuries. Twelve others were also injured. In today's Kitchener Record newspaper there  was an article discussing how the three daughters of the deceased were escorted by local police to visit their surviving father, Davie Goodfellow, in a London hospital. These are never things that are easy to discuss in a delicate manner.

Again, while I accept the professionalism of our journalists and news media, I find the coverage lacking in substance. Could this event have been prevented? What actually happened? The public and relatives of the deceased are poorly served by that lack of substance.

I visited the site on August 23rd and the following photos explain some of the evidence. First, the photo below shows a view looking eastbound along the south, paved shoulder of Highway 401 just after it has divided from Highway 403. The truck in the background is just in front of the energy attenuator that was struck by the bus.



Although you cannot see the tire marks from the bus in this view it provides a general description of the surroundings. The bus travelled at such an angle that it was positioned in a similar manner at impact as the parked truck in the background. In other words the bus travelled completely off the eastbound lanes and began producing tire marks on this paved shoulder before striking the barrier. The photo below shows the area of the shoulder after the bus has already left the paved shoulder. If you look closely at the gravel area, just at the edge of the grass, you should be able to see the dual tire marks from the right side wheels of the bus.



If you are observant you will also notice that the surface of the gravel changes halfway through the visible tire marks. In other words the tire mark is well defined in the foreground but about halfway through you should see that the gravel/asphalt mixture has been greatly disturbed. To me, this is an indication that the driver has applied close to maximum braking. In other words, the earlier portion of the tire mark on the shoulder shows evidence of braking because I do not believe that such marks would remain beyond 24 hours if there had not been some sliding between the tires and pavement. But the latter portion of the tire mark that you see above indicates much more aggressive braking. The photo below now shows the right side tire marks of the bus in the more aggressive area of braking. You can see that those right side tire marks travel just to the right of the right side of the parked truck.


Next, the photo below shows the view just beyond the front end of the parked truck and we can now see the barrier that was struck by the bus.




What you should notice is that this energy-dissipating barrier was originally positioned at about the front end of the truck and that it has been compressed, like an accordian, into its present position. You should be able to see the rail on the ground on which the barrier was stationed and how it rode this rail as it was being compressed. Below is another view of the barrier and the rail upon which it rode as it was compressed.




And again, another view,  below, taken from the south side of the barrier...


...and finally a view looking westbound, looking down onto the compressed system.


While at the site I heard a highway maintenance representative comment on how well this device performed. Similar comments were also made by police during a news interview.

While I agree with the comments that the barrier did the maximum job that it was capable of, the fact remains that the bus used up all of the barrier's benefits and still had sufficient energy left over to move past the barrier and rollover. So is that the best that we could accomplish? Have the highway personnel and police determined therefore that this particular bus was travelling unusually quickly and that it overcame the design of the barrier system because of that fact? Yet, during a news interview the police confirmed that they are still investigating and that the results of that investigation will not be available for several months. I would say that the police have not determined the speed of the bus at this time and the comments made suggesting that the barrier was adequate and performed properly are premature.

I would venture to say that the bus was likely equipped with an event data recorder in the engine control module (ECM) and the downloading of such data requires special equipment that is not readily available to the investigating police - therefore the reason for the delay.

But several questions remain that were not addressed by any official news media. For example, one media representative stated at the site that she had been there on the accident date and she had not observed the tire marks that I have indicated in my photos. How could I be sure that they were collision-related? In fact, she rode her news truck over top of the tire marks (luckily after I had already taken my photos). It is clear, and understandable, that news personnel are not accident reconstructionists and simply miss the evidence that is literally at their feet. So the question remains: Why are there about 50 metres of pre-impact braking marks on the shoulder before the bus struck the barrier? To cause them would imply that the driver was in control of the bus and not asleep, for example.

I am now going to show you another view (below) of the area at the beginning of the tire marks. I have increased the resolution of the photo slightly. If you look closely you will see some faint, yellow crayon markings that are near the beginning of the visible marks.




Note that, at a speed of about 110 km/h a vehicle travels about 30 metres every second. So if the bus was travelling at this highway speed then the driver would have applied his/her brakes in the range of two to three seconds before impact depending on the actual rate of deceleration. One might question, if the driver had time to applied his/her brakes, why would the driver not steer away from the barrier? Would it make any difference at such a high speed with such a large vehicle?  These are the type of questions that result from this finding.

Another question that I already touched upon is the functioning of the barrier during the crash. This barrier absorbed all the energy it could have. It was crushed to the very edge of the concrete New Jersey barrier. So is that satisfactory? When you look at the photos of the compressed barrier you can see that the forward end is lifted up and is resting to the north of its original position. One might be convinced that, once the structure was compressed past the end of the ground rail it was then free to be displaced from its anchored position. It would appear that the bus rode over top of that front face of the barrier and this contributed to the instability and eventual rollover. But ideally what we would like to see is a controlled ride down of the striking vehicle such that it sits, on its wheels, in contact with the barrier until final rest. This is the point of many barrier systems that try to slow down the vehicle while keeping it upright and preventing the vehicle from being deflected into other dangers. For example if the bus had been deflected into the eastbound lanes of the 401 and then the bus was crushed by a road tractor hauling 80,000 pounds of cargo, and if all the occupants were fatally injured there would be a loud chorus of complainers criticizing the function of the barrier. So why is it satisfactory that the bus was deflected into the "elephant pit" of the deep median where it rolled over? My point is that a barrier system must exist that will protect the type of vehicles predominantly using the highway. It is easily seen that at least 50% of the traffic on Highway 401 is made up of large and heavy trucks and buses and these vehicles possess very high levels of kinetic energy. It may not be possible to slow these vehicles in a controlled manner while maintaining them upright but that is the discussion that should be carried on. If the present barrier was a couple of metres longer would that have been sufficient to dissipate the remaining energy of the bus rather than having it roll over in the ditch? That is an important safety issue that the news media have not touched.

A final question I will bring to your attention is the mechanism of injury to the occupants of the bus. First I must point out that, after the barrier impact the bus was not travelling very quickly and therefore the chance of sustaining injury from events after the barrier impact should have been small IF the occupants had stayed inside the bus during the rollover. Let's look at some evidence of the rollover. First let's look at a general view of the site near the final rest position of the bus. The view below is taken looking north-west (if we assume Highway 401 travels directly east-west).


I will simply point out that the distance from the impact with the barrier and the bus rest position is not long. Along that distance we can examine the debris. For example the photo below shows an area of fractured glass.


When glass is not strewn throughout the site like this it often means that the vehicle depositing the glass is not travelling quickly.



We also know the bus was travelling slowly at this time simply because we know its rest position was nearby. The problem with many rollovers is that occupants become ejected, or more correctly, partially ejected. We often believe that ejection implies that the occupant's body sails freely out of the confines of the vehicle. Nothing could be more wrong.

When we are ejected the vehicle follows us and crushes us. This is what nobody explains. When ejected our body travels at a similar speed as the vehicle from which we came out of. Over longer distances our body sometimes travels ahead of our vehicle and then sometimes the vehicle catches up and crushes us, or vise versa. So our body is in this death dance with a 4000 pound car, or a much heavier bus or truck. Obviously this is not a good thing and this is why it is paramount that we stay inside our vehicle during a rollover.

But the concern with buses is one that has been discussed over decades. Should passengers wear seat belts on buses? This is a long-debated issue with school buses. It was decided that a school bus should be equipped in such a way to minimize the chance of an ejection. So, for example, there were "bars" installed across the centre of the side windows of school buses to reduce the hole through which a body could escape. But Transport Canada, NHTSA and others have always been monitoring bus crashes to see if things are performing as they should. So to return to my question: how did the occupants of this bus in the current crash sustain their injuries? Were some ejected? If so then that is an important safety issue if the bus was travelling very slowly and near its final rest position when the ejection occurred. Again, the official news media simply failed to ask this question and failed to inform the public about this very important safety issue.

So maybe I am being a little harsh in my condemnation of the press. But I say, as always, that we need to learn from these events. Research confirms that scaring people into a change of habit is not a long-lasting solution. But educating people is a long lasting solution. If we understand what it is and why it is dangerous we will change our habits. We take so much time in educating ourselves about less important things yet something that can easily, and so often does, kill us is left to our ignorance.