View Single Post
  #77   Report Post  
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
[email protected] wmbjkREMOVE@citlink.net is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 544
Default OT - Turkeys Voting for Christmas -- was The Lancet's Vaccine Retraction -- A medical journal's role in the autism scare

On Fri, 5 Feb 2010 07:46:11 -0800, "John R. Carroll"
wrote:

wrote:
On Thu, 4 Feb 2010 12:40:56 -0800, "John R. Carroll"
wrote:

wrote:
On Thu, 4 Feb 2010 10:55:11 -0800, "John R. Carroll"
wrote:

wrote:


I saw one exec claim that there were something like 8 confirmed
defective parts (pedal pivots dragging or sticking) out of 2
million.

The Toyota brand has killed or injured more people in the last
decade wih this defect than every other maunfacturer combined.

That seems highly unlikely. Got any cites?

NPR here in LA had an hour on this last week.

SHAPIRO: What, specifically, is the committee looking at here?

LANGFITT: Well, they're asking for lots of documents. And what
they've said, is they want to know when Toyota and the National
Highway Traffic Safety Administration first learned about these
potential safety problems and what they did to investigate and try
to resolve them. Now the committee said this in a statement, I'm
kind of quoting here, our government figures show nearly twice as
many people died in Toyotas from sudden acceleration problems in the
last decade than in cars from all other automakers combined. So
thats another thing theyre really very interested in, is the number
and the volume and how many of those are Toyotas.

http://www.npr.mobi/templates/story/...ryId=123098947.


Well, there you go. The guy said he was "kind of quoting", and I can't
find anything to back up his recollection.


http://www-odi.nhtsa.dot.gov/defects/


J.R.C. (above): "The Toyota brand has killed or injured more people
in the last decade with this defect than every other manufacturer
combined."

By posting a link to the NHTSA site, are you trying to say that one
can find evidence of your assertion there? Then why not post the link
to that search, or at least the details of how you or Langfiit arrived
at your conclusion? Why do you suppose that the LA Times, who
apparently mined the same data, didn't get the same results? And why
do you think that they used the very qualified phrase "related to
possible sudden acceleration", while you were able to be so
definitive?

Wayne