Steven Levitt shares data that shows car seats are no more effective than seatbelts in protecting kids from dying in cars. However, during the Q&A, he makes one crucial caveat.
Greg Laden's Blog
Evolution, Life Sciences, Science Education, Human Evolution, and Stuff
Recent Comments
- Jason Thibeault on Installing Linux in Under 5 minutes
- mk on Installing Linux in Under 5 minutes
- icedogg on Squat Toilets, Sexy People, and The Nature of the Internet
- Ken on SkepchickCon was an unmitigated success
- daedalus2u on Morning Sickness is an Adaptation, not a ... Sickness
- GaryB, FCD on Installing Linux in Under 5 minutes
- Greg Laden on Installing Linux in Under 5 minutes
- SLC on Reinstalling Grub
- MPL on Installing Linux in Under 5 minutes
- Harold on SkepchickCon was an unmitigated success
Profile
Welcome to Greg Laden's Blog.
Search
Blogroll
Archives
- June 2009
- May 2009
- April 2009
- March 2009
- February 2009
- January 2009
- December 2008
- November 2008
- October 2008
- September 2008
- August 2008
- July 2008
- June 2008
- May 2008
- April 2008
- March 2008
- February 2008
- January 2008
- December 2007
- November 2007
- October 2007
Recent Posts
- Scientia pro publica # Seven
- SkepchickCon was an unmitigated success
- Genome Size and Flight in Bats
- Linux: Schedule tasks
- Installing Linux in Under 5 minutes
- Qi Zhang's electrifying organ performance
- Evolution vs. Creationism on Family Guy
- Does your Windows have a bad virus? How to fix with Linux
- Reinstalling Grub
- An interview with death
« Blog Roll | Main | Georgy Dobrovolsky, Vladislav Volkov and Viktor Patsayev »
Steven Levitt: Are children's carseats necessary?
Posted on: July 1, 2008 10:29 PM, by Greg Laden
TrackBacks
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://scienceblogs.com/mt/pings/75132


Comments
This guy's approach, where he weaves the story of the "two cures" without telling you what he's actually taking about -- to build the suspense or whatever the hell he thinks he's doing -- is annoying as hell, to the point that if I were in the audience, I would have thrown a soda at him by about 45 seconds... What an asshole.
Posted by: Woody Tanaka | July 2, 2008 8:33 AM
I thought the cure thing was a brilliant idea executed here for the very first time and done poorly. Yes, annoying as hell. The TED audience was getting a first draft. Maybe the guy has a future in blogging.
But I went ahead an put this up because I think his point is interesting. (This does not mean I agree with him.)
Posted by: Greg Laden | July 2, 2008 8:54 AM
the point is interesting, but the idea that he is trying to "resolve" the date into his hypothesis seems a bit off. to me that smacks of refusing to let go of a concept, despite the evidence against it, or at least of an extremely narrow view... I think the TED producers made the interesting decision to include just that one question at the end. I've watched a lot of their videos, and that is pretty unusual.
btw, in the story of the father and the placebo pills, he left out a third possible reason for fewer patients coming back, that they were actually sick and had died in the interim. his lack of interest in the serious injury outcome and the father's apparent lack of interest in follow-up care seem of a piece...
Posted by: peter | July 2, 2008 11:24 AM
I'd have to look more into the matter to form an opinion on his conclusion, but speaking to the talk itself:
The idea was a good one, it was definitely the delivery that was lacking.
Posted by: JanieBelle | July 2, 2008 11:25 AM
Levitt has posted his thoughts.
http://freakonomics.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/07/02/a-speech-of-mine-that-bombed/
Posted by: cephyn | July 2, 2008 3:49 PM