safety

阅读 / 问答 / 标签

充电器上safety是什么意思

充电器的安全认证标准

safe;safely;safety的区别

词性不同 分别是形容词 副词 名词

电路中的safety是什么意思

电路中的safety是安全的意思

safety和security的区别

高斋翻译Joy分享:security 侧重于国家方面的安全,安保问题例如:national security国家安全有点儿抽象意义的安全He loves the security of a happy life...他喜欢幸福家庭生活带来的安全感。大方面的安全,比如粮食安全就是food security,强调保障粮食供应等,security也可指法律和财产上的担保问题。如financial security财产担保;safety 则侧重于人本身的安全,指让人本身免受外界伤害,指处于安全状态。例如:a place where children can play in safety可以让儿童安全玩耍的地方He was kept in custody for his own safety. 拘押他是为了他本人的安全。补充:safety的习语safety first (saying)安全第一 safety is the most important thingthere"s safety in numbers (saying)人多保险being a group makes you safer and makes you feel more confident

safety是什麽意思

(名词)安全;保险;安全设备;保险装置

什么是Safety

歌逐晨雾飞,

电路中的safety是什么意思

“Safety”中文是“安全”的意思。电路中的“Safety”,往往是指同“安全”有关的系统、设备、电路、元件等。例如:在电气的安全系统中就会标上“Safety”;又例如:当设备的运行参数异常,若继续运行将导致发生事故。为了避免这种状况而配置的安全保护电路或装置,在图中也会标上“Safety”;有时候在电路图中,一个按钮或指示灯旁标有“Safety”,那就是用于安全停车的紧急停车按钮和相应的指示灯。

safety是什么意思中文

safety 安全

safety是什么意思

n.安全;安全性adj.保障安全的

safety是什么意思

1、safety的意思:n.安全;平安;安全性;无危险;安全处所;(美式足球)中卫;2、safety的读音:英[_se_fti]美[_se_fti]3、[例句]Thenewlegislationconcernshealthandsafetyatwork.这项新法规涉及工作场所的健康与安全。

“safety”是什么意思?

一、safety释义:1、英 [ˈseɪfti]  美 [ˈseɪfti] 2、n. 安全;保险;安全设备;保险装置;安打二、短语1、thread safety 线程安全 ; 线程安全性 ; 多绪安全性 ; 线程平安性2、Safety Valves 安全阀 ; 平安阀 ; 保险阀3、safety goggle 安全眼罩 ; 护目镜 ; 防护镜 ; 安然眼罩扩展资料一、safety近义词;insurance1、英 [ɪnˈʃʊərəns; ɪnˈʃɔːrəns]  美 [ɪnˈʃʊrəns] 2、n. 保险;保险费;保险契约;赔偿金二、短语1、medical insurance 医疗保险 ; 医疗保险费 ; 医疗保障 ; 医疗安全2、unemployment insurance [保险] 失业保险 ; 待业保险费 ; 失业保险金 ; 失业保障3、mutual insurance 相互保险公司 ; [保险] 相互保险 ; 互助保险 ; 互相保险

safety什么意思

safety英[ˈseɪfti]美[ˈsefti]n.安全; 安全性; 安全处所; 中卫;adj.保障安全的;[例句]1、The report goes on to make a number of recommendations to improve safety on aircraft.该报告接着给出了一系列改善飞机安全性能的建议。2、The new car design incorporates all the latest safety features.新的汽车设计具备最新安全措施的一切特点。3、The safety of the ship is the captain"s responsibility.确保船只的安全是船长的责任。4、They offer tips on topics such as home safety.他们就家居安全等问题提供建议。5、The built-in safety device compensates for a fall in water pressure.该内置式安全装置在水压下降时能提供保护。6、The five survivors eventually reached safety, ragged, half-starved and exhausted.5位幸存者最终到达安全之地时已经衣衫褴褛、饥肠辘辘、精疲力尽。

safety equipment是什么意思

安全设备!

safety nurse什么意思

safety nurse安全护士nurse[英][nɜ:s][美][nɜ:rs]n.护士,看护; 奶妈,保姆,阿妈,保育员; 保护人,培养者,养成所,发祥地; [植]保护树,[虫]保护虫,保育虫,[动]世代交替的无性期的个体; vt.& vi.护理; 照料; 喂; 吃奶; vt.培育; 怀抱; 搂抱; 调治; 例句:1.Your nurse will explain the discharge instruction carefully to you. 您的护士会详细地为您讲解出院说明的。

ICH-GCP 5.3 Participant Safety & Adverse Events(3)

Part 5: Adverse Event Follow-up Part 6: Summary of Key PointsUnless otherwise specified in the protocol, in some networks it is common practice that all AEs and non- study–related SAEs should be followed-up until they have resolved or stabilized or until 30 days after the participant"s involvement in the study has ended, whichever occurs sooner. 除非协议中另有规定,在一些网络中,通常的做法是 对所有不良事件和非研究相关的严重不良事件进行随访,直到它们得到解决或稳定,或者直到参与者参与研究结束后30天,以较早发生者为准。 All SAEs should be followed until resolution, or until the condition has stabilized with no further change expected. According to FDA guidance, participants should receive appropriate medical evaluation and treatment until resolution of any emergent condition related to the study intervention that develops during or after the course of their participation in a study, even if the follow-up period extends beyond the end of the study. 应遵循所有SAE,直到问题得到解决,或直到情况稳定且预计不会发生进一步变化。根 据FDA的指导,参与者应接受适当的医疗评估和治疗,直到其参与研究期间或之后出现的与研究干预相关的任何紧急情况得到解决, 即使随访期延长到研究结束之后。 When a participant discontinues participation in a study because of an SAE, investigators should: 当参与者因为SAE而停止参与某项研究时,研究人员应: Ⅰ、Continue to follow up the SAE as noted above. Ⅱ、Document the SAE and its follow-up in the participant"s record. Ⅲ、Attempt to complete any final evaluations required by the study protocol. Ⅳ、Attempt to perform other medical evaluations to try to determine the cause of the SAE and its possible relationship to the study intervention. These evaluations would include obtaining an autopsy report, if available, in the event of a participant"s death. 1、继续 跟进上述SAE 。 2、在参与者记录中 记录SAE及其后续行动 。 3、尝试完成研究方案要求的任何 最终评估 。 4、尝试进行其他医学评估,以确定SAE的原因及其与研究干预的可能关系。这些评估包括在参与者死亡的情况下获得尸检报告(如有)。 For a woman who is discontinued from a study because of pregnancy, attempt to follow up the outcome of the pregnancy to term. If the woman was enrolled in a trial of an investigational drug that is known to present a risk of birth defects, any information regarding birth or congenital abnormality should be obtained. 对于因怀孕而中止研究的女性,尝试跟踪妊娠至足月的结果。如果该妇女 参加了已知存在出生缺陷风险的试验药物的试验,则应获得有关出生或先天异常的任何信息 。 Loss to follow-up of participants with ongoing SAEs is a serious problem that can affect the validity of a study"s results. For this reason, every effort should be made to contact participants who leave a study after experiencing an SAE. Documentation of that effort should be maintained by the PI. 对患有持续严重不良事件的受试者的随访失败是一个严重的问题 ,可能会影响研究结果的有效性。因此,应尽一切努力联系经历SAE后离开研究的参与者。PI应保存该工作的文件。Data and safety monitoring plays an essential role in protecting participant safety and ensuring the integrity of a research study. The objectives of data and safety monitoring are to: 数据和安全监控在保护参与者安全和确保研究完整性方面起着至关重要的作用 。数据和安全监控的目标是: Ⅰ、Ensure that risks of participation in a clinical study are minimized as far as is reasonably possible. Ⅱ、Avoid exposing participants to excessive risk. Ⅲ、Ensure the integrity of the data collected in a clinical study. Ⅳ、Stop a study    i、If safety concerns arise, or    ii、As soon as the study objectives have been overwhelmingly met, criteria usually spelled out before the study begins. 1、确保尽可能降低参与临床研究的风险。 2、避免参与者面临过度风险。 3、确保临床研究中收集的数据的完整性。 4、停止学习 (1)如果出现安全问题,或 (2)一旦完全达到研究目标,通常在研究开始前制定标准。 The following are key points to remember about data and safety monitoring: 以下是有关数据和安全监控的要点: Ⅰ、Data and safety monitoring must occur periodically throughout every study. The frequency of monitoring is commensurate with the risks involved in the study, as well as the size and complexity of the study (i.e. a small, single-site Phase I trial versus a large, blinded, multi-site Phase III trial). 1、在每次研究过程中,必须定期进行数据和安全监测。 监测频率与研究中涉及的风险以及研究的规模和复杂性 (即小型、单点i期试验与大型、盲法、多点III期试验)相称 Ⅱ、Periodic data summary reports are prepared to determine if the study should change in any way or stop. Any significant changes in the study are implemented with the approval of the local IRB and reported to appropriate institutional officials, the study sponsor, and the FDA (if the study involves an investigational new drug or device). 2、准备定期数据总结报告,以确定研究是否应以任何方式改变或停止。 本研究中的任何重大变化均应在获得当地IRB批准后实施,并向相关机构官员、研究赞助者和FDA报告 (如果本研究涉及研究新药或装置)。 Ⅲ、The risks and benefits of the study must be reassessed whenever any new study data become available. 3、一旦有了新的研究数据,就必须 重新评估这项研究的风险和益处 。Scenario : Based on the research protocol for a behavioral non-drug study, research staff report all serious adverse events (SAEs) and report adverse events (AEs) only when an increase in the severity or frequency of a pre-existing symptom or condition occurs. 情景 :根据行为非药物研究的研究方案,研究人员报告所有严重不良事件(SAE),并且仅当先前存在的症状或条件的严重程度或频率增加时才报告不良事件(AE)。 Question : For participants that were screened, enrolled, and randomized sometime prior to experiencing the medical events described below, which are considered SAEs? 问题 :对于在经历以下所述医疗事件之前经过筛选、登记和随机分组的参与者,哪些被视为严重不良事件? A. Participant reports severe neck pain after a whiplash injury in a car accident that occurred in the previous week. B. Participant reports an ER visit due to pneumonia and was hospitalized subsequently for treatment with intravenous antibiotics. C. Participant with a history of mild asthma reports a 2-day hospital stay for severe asthma attack treatment in the study"s final week. D. Participant (A) and (B) only E. Participant (B) and (C) only F. Participant (A) and (C) only 1、参与者报告在前一周发生的车祸中颈部扭伤后出现严重颈部疼痛。 2、参与者报告因肺炎就诊,随后住院接受静脉抗生素治疗。 3、有轻度哮喘病史的参与者报告在研究的最后一周因严重哮喘发作而住院2天。 4、仅限参与者(A)和(B) 5、仅限参与者(B)和(C) 6、仅限参与者(A)和(C) Feedback : Which is the best response: A, B, C, D, E, or F? For Scenario B, the participant experienced a medical occurrence that led to hospitalization. For Scenario C, the participant"s pre-existing condition worsened to require intensive treatment and a hospital stay. Both cases are considered SAEs. Therefore, the correct response is E. 反馈 :A、B、C、D、E或F哪个是最好的回答?对于方案B,参与者经历了导致住院的医疗事故。对于情景C,参与者先前存在的病情恶化,需要强化治疗和住院。这两种情况都被视为严重不良事件。因此,正确的回答是E。Question : A 15 year old male has come in for a site visit. The participant was randomized to product Z for treatment of severe cystic acne. The participant"s parents report that after several weeks on the treatment the participant had mood swings, was crying, said he was “feeling blue” and attempted suicide. The participant discontinued the drug. 问题:一名15岁的男性来现场参观。参与者被随机分配到产品Z治疗严重囊性痤疮。受试者的父母报告说,接受治疗数周后,受试者情绪波动,哭泣,说他“感到忧郁”,并试图自杀。受试者停药。 Is this a reportable event(s)? A. Yes B. No Feedback: Which is the best response: A or B? Suicide attempt is a reportable event. Therefore, the correct response is A. 反馈:哪一个是最好的回答:A还是B?自杀未遂是应报告的事件。因此,正确的回答是A。Ⅰ、The safety and well-being of study participants must be safeguarded at all times during the conduct of a clinical research study. 1、在进行临床研究期间,必须始终保障研究参与者的安全和福祉。 Ⅱ、An adverse event (AE) is defined in the Good Clinical Practice guidelines as any “untoward medical occurrence” in a person who receives a drug while participating in a clinical study. The occurrence need not be causally related to the drug treatment. 2、不良事件(AE)在《良好临床实践指南》中定义为 在参与临床研究期间服用药物的人的任何“不良医疗事件” 。这种情况的发生 不一定与药物治疗有因果关系 。 Ⅲ、For behavioral studies, an AE may be defined as “any unfavorable, unintended diagnosis, symptom, sign (including an abnormal laboratory finding), syndrome, or disease that occurs during the study, having been absent at baseline, or—if present at baseline—appears to worsen.” 3、对于行为研究,AE可定义为 “研究过程中出现的任何不利、意外的诊断、症状、体征(包括异常的实验室发现)、综合征或疾病,在基线检查时未出现,或者在基线检查时出现,则会恶化。 ” Ⅳ、An AE is considered serious if it poses a threat to the patient"s life or functioning. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) defines a serious adverse event (SAE) as any untoward medical occurrence that:    i、Results in death, or    ii、Life threatening (places the patient at risk of death), or    iii、Requires hospitalization or prolongs an existing hospitalization, or    iv、Causes persistent or significant disability or incapacity, or    v、Is a congenital anomaly/birth defect, or    vi、Requires medical intervention to prevent one of the above outcomes. 4、如果AE对患者的生命或功能构成威胁,则视为严重AE。美国食品和药物管理局(FDA)将严重不良事件(SAE)定义为以下任何不良医疗事件: (1) 导致死亡 ,或 (2) 危及生命 (使患者面临死亡风险),或 (3) 需要住院或延长现有住院时间 ,或 (4)导致持续或严重 残疾 或无行为能力,或 (5) 是先天性异常/出生缺陷 ,或 (6)需要 医疗干预 以防止上述结果之一。 Ⅴ、The Investigator in a behavioral trial may modify or expand the FDA criteria for an SAE to reflect the specific risks of the intervention and the characteristics of the study population. 5、行为试验中的研究者可修改或扩展FDA SAE标准,以反映干预的具体风险和研究人群的特征。 Ⅵ、The severity of an AE is not the same as its seriousness. An adverse event may be severe (e.g., severe pain from a toothache) without being serious (threatening the patient"s life or functioning). 6、不 良事件的严重程度与其严重程度不同 。不良事件可能是严重的(如牙痛引起的剧烈疼痛),但并不严重(威胁患者的生命或功能)。 Ⅶ、SAEs must be reported by phone or fax immediately to all parties notified as specified in the protocol. 7、严重不良事件必须立即通过电话或传真报告给协议中规定的所有相关方。 Ⅷ、The purpose of expedited reporting to the FDA or other regulatory authority is to ensure that the appropriate parties—including investigators, sponsors, regulators, and IRBs—are quickly made aware of new, important information about the potential adverse effects of a drug or other experimental intervention. 8、向FDA或其他监管机构快速报告的目的是 确保相关方 (包括调查人员、赞助者、监管机构和IRB) 迅速了解有关药物或其他实验干预潜在不良反应的新的重要信息 。 Ⅸ、In addition to reporting AEs and SAEs, NIH-funded studies are required to report unanticipated problems that affect the safety of study participants and others. While unanticipated problems are found in and regulated by 45 CFR 46, OHRP provides the criteria for determining unanticipated problems and the reporting and review of these incidents (see OHRP, 2007). 9、除了报告不良事件和严重不良事件外, NIH资助的研究还需要报告影响研究参与者和其他人安全的意外问题。 虽然《美国联邦法规汇编》第45卷第46节中发现并规定了意外问题,但OHRP提供了确定意外问题以及报告和审查这些事件的标准(见OHRP,2007)。 Ⅹ、Generally, all AEs and SAEs should be followed up until they have resolved or stabilized. 10、一般来说,所有的AEs和SAEs都应该被跟踪,直到它们被解决或稳定下来。 Ⅺ、Data and safety monitoring must occur periodically throughout every study to protect participant safety and ensure the integrity of study data, for example, by the Data and Safety Monitoring Board for a clinical trial. 11、 数据和安全性监测必须在每项研究中定期进行 , 以保护参与者的安全性并确保研究数据的完整性 ,例如,由临床试验数据和安全性监测委员会进行监测。

safety怎么读

safety读音是[ˈseɪfti]。表达意思:安全;安全性;安全场所,安全的地方;安全方法,安全措施; <美>(枪炮的)保险栓,保险机;安全卫;<美,非正式> 安全套;(棒球)安打;安全设备;(特征、措施)保障安全的。词性:通常在句中既可以作名词,也可以作形容词。例句1、He assured himself of her safety. 他确定她是安全的。2、Two casualties were airlifted to safety. 两名伤亡人员已空运到安全地区。3、The airline has an excellent safety record. 这家航空公司有极佳的安全记录。

safetyfeeling是什么意思

安全感

safety barrier是什么意思

安全屏障~~~~~~

有人知道这个单位吗?美国全国公路交通安全管理局 (National Highway Traffic Safety Administration)介绍

  The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA, often pronounced "nit-suh") is an agency of the Executive Branch of the U.S. Government, part of the Department of Transportation. It describes its mission as “Save lives, prevent injuries, reduce vehicle-related crashes.”[1].  One of NHTSA"s major achievements in pursuit of this mission is the data files maintained by the National Center for Statistics and Analysis. In particular, the Fatality Analysis Reporting System, or FARS, has become a resource for traffic safety research not only in the US, but throughout the world. Research contributions using FARS by researchers from many countries appear in many non-US technical publications, and provide the most solid knowledge on the subject.  The agency has an annual budget of US $815 Million (2007).  History  In 1940, the United States implemented automobile design legislation, concerning sealed beam headlamps, which had recently been invented and were an important safety advance at that time. This regulation, virtually unchanged for the next 40 years, set a pattern of using auto safety design legislation to freeze innnovation at a point in time.  In 1958, the UN established the World Forum for Harmonization of Vehicle Regulations. The United States refused to join, but vehicles meeting these established safety standards were legal to import into the United States.  In 1965 and 1966, public pressure grew in the US to increase the safety of cars, culminating with the publishing of Ralph Nader"s book Unsafe at Any Speed, and the National Academy of Sciences" "Accidental Death and Disability - The Neglected Disease of Modern Society".  In 1966, Congress held a series of highly publicized hearings regarding highway safety, and passed legislation to make installation of seat belts mandatory, and created several predecessor agencies which would eventually become the NHTSA, including the National Traffic Safety Agency, the National Highway Safety Agency, and the National Highway Safety Bureau.  The NHTSA was officially established in 1970 by the Highway Safety Act of 1970. In 1972, the Motor Vehicle Information and Cost Savings Act expanded NHTSA"s scope to include consumer information programs.  Since this era, automobiles have become far better in protecting their occupants in vehicle impacts. The number of deaths on American highways hover around 40,000 annually, a lower death rate per mile travelled than in the 1960s.  NHTSA has conducted numerous high-profile investigations of automotive safety issues, including the Audi 5000/60 Minutes affair and the Ford Explorer rollover problem.  In the US, NHTSA has introduced a rule making Electronic Stability Control mandatory on all passenger vehicles by the 2012 model year. This is remarkably fast for a technology first brought to public attention in 1997, with the Swedish moose test.  Consumers today have a far greater amount of auto safety information available, due to the efforts of NHTSA and the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety.  US safety performance since creation of NHTSA  In the mid 1960s, when what is now NHTSA came in being, the USA had safer traffic than any country in the world, whether measured by the number of traffic deaths per thousand vehicles, or the number of traffic deaths per 100 million miles.  In 2002, the US had sunk to 16th place (behind Australia, Austria, Canada, Denmark, Finland, Germany, Great Britain, Iceland, Japan, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Sweden, and Switzerland) in terms of deaths per thousand vehicles. In terms of deaths per 100 million miles, the USA had dropped from first place to tenth place.  Simple raw numbers of annual traffic deaths, all from readily available government data (FARS for US), show the pattern clearly using three comparison countries that are otherwise similar to the US.  1979 Fatalities 2002 Fatalities Percent Change  United States 51,093 42,815 -16.2%  Great Britain 6,352 3,431 -46.0%  Canada 5,863 2,936 -49.9%  Australia 3,508 1,715 -51.1%  If US fatalities had dropped by the same close to 50% amount experienced in the other countries, the US would now be suffering about 27,000 annual traffic deaths, instead of the actual 42,000. By not decreasing as has occurred in other countries, about 15,000 additional Americans are being killed on its roads annually [2].  While data leave no doubt of the enormity of the failure, the extent of NHTSA"s responsibility cannot be so easily determined. However, what is clear from decades of scientific research is that behavioral factors are vastly more important than vehicle factors. Even NHTSA"s own research established this in a classic large scale study performed in Indiana University in the mid 1970s. Based on multi-disciplinary examinations, the vehicle was identified as the primary factor in only 2% of 5,000 crashes investigated. Even for these, the vehicle factor was mainly related to poor maintenance of brakes and tires. (Detailed reports summarized in Treat JR. A study of precrash factors involved in traffic accidents. The HSRI Research Review. Ann Arbor, MI; May-August 1980.)  As much of the rest of this article so clearly attests, NHTSA"s efforts have focused largely on those vehicle factors which research shows to be of microscopic relevance. The vehicle mix, and vehicle regulations in Canada are not all that different from those in the US, yet Canada cut its traffic deaths in half while those in the US declined by only 16%; this discrepancy strongly suggests that the factors that Canada (et al.) emphasized are much more important.  Any discussion of the effect NHTSA has had on US safety must start with broad results derived from data that are not in dispute – are not controversial.  Born from Oligopoly  The neutrality of this section is disputed.  Please see the discussion on the talk page.  In the era when NHTSA began, a commonly repeated saying in the US auto industry was "safety does not sell." From a modern perspective, this seems unusual, since auto manufacturers now prominently feature safety features and positive safety ratings in their advertising, but the automobile market in the US at this time in history had some unusual characteristics.  At the time NHTSA was established, the US auto market was an oligopoly, with just three companies controlling 85% of the market. In economics, oligopoly is a type of market failure. US manufacturers (which had innovated the automatic transmission, air conditioning, and power steering in the post-War years) suddenly realized that any innovation in safety would be unprofitable.  Some of the major car safety innovations of the 20th century, like roll cage construction, seat belts and traction control, were therefore developed abroad in response to competitive market forces in those territories.  Government agencies have only a modest record of success in the area of innovation and breakthrough design, but they are widely perceived as good at establishing minimum acceptable standards.  Faced with this situation, the normally free market capitalist Americans sought government help. Car manufacturers appeared to be dragging their feet on improving vehicle safety in the American market. Some saw parallels to the 1906 case of Upton Sinclair and meatpacking. Command and control legislation appeared to many to be a wise course of action at the time.  This move was controversial, with other Americans feeling that if a certain passenger vehicle is not safe, the consumer is perfectly free not to purchase it. They would point to Volvo, which equipped its cars with seat belts beginning in 1959, and was available to Americans. The real market failure in this view was the lack of safety information. Other than providing this information, the government has no role.  The command and control group won this argument and NHTSA reflects this view. Cars that fall outside of NHTSA regulations are actually illegal for Americans to possess.  Today the US auto market has fragmented and is far more competitive, leading to advances in car safety, technological innovation, and price competition.  Unintended consequences  Design legislation led to many unintended consequences, especially in the early days of NHTSA.  Many of these spring from the fact that Americans in the 1960s, 1970s, and early 1980s often preferred not to wear seat belts - yet these are one of the single most important safety devices ever created. NHTSA struggled with this fact and came up with the seatbelt interlock in 1974, that prevented the car from starting unless the occupants were belted. The interlock provoked such an uproar that it was quickly pulled from the market.  Also in 1974, NHTSA banned the Citroën SM automobile, which contemporary journalists noted was one of the safest vehicles available at the time, due to a design issue unrelated to safety (bumper standards that took effect for 1973 and were aimed ineffectually at controlling the costs resulting from collisions) and because it was not equipped with sealed-beam headlamps, which at the time were outmoded but mandatory in the US.  Joan Claybrook, then NHTSA administrator appointed by President Carter in return for a political favor, was so ignorant of automotive safety-related matters that European car manufacturers found it incredible she was in charge of traffic safety for the world"s largest auto market[citation needed]. Under Claybrook, NHTSA engaged in rulemaking of dubious and/or negative benefit to safety, such as requiring auto speedometers not to display calibrations higher than 85 mph (about 140km/h), refusal to approve the better headlamps on grounds that improved headlamp performance would encourage faster night driving, and lobbying hard for airbags designed around the assumption of unbelted vehicle occupants of adult-male size and weight. Such bags are too large and powerful for belted and/or smaller vehicle occupants, who can be severely injured or even killed when such bags deploy. Claybrook"s airbag advocacy was factually and scientifically baseless and designed to create a personal legacy; she described airbags as "puffing like a pillow"[cite this quote], when in fact overly-powerful airbags designed to comply with regulations her agency wrote resulted at least 150 deaths before the safety regulations were twice rewritten to permit less aggressive multistage-deployment bags. Too, the US air bag mandate violates Federal cost-effectiveness regulations for mandatory auto safety devices {{{author}}}, {{{title}}}, [[{{{publisher}}}]], [[{{{date}}}]]..  These cost-effectiveness regulations, frequently used as justification for lax crash avoidance safety performance standards, were simply and illegally disregarded by NHTSA under Claybrook"s administration. When HID headlamps appeared on the market, NHTSA made no move to require automatic beam levelling or lens cleaning equipment, citing lack of cost-effectiveness. Both of these systems are glare-control measures required with these powerful headlamps under ECE Regulations followed outside North America.  The world"s first halogen headlamp bulbs, high-performance designs known as H1 and H3, were introduced in Europe in 1962 and 1964, respectively, and quickly became standard the world over, but they were not permitted in the US until 1997. Likewise, the first two-filament high/low beam halogen headlamp bulb, another high-performance design called H4, was introduced in Europe in 1971 and immediately became the world standard, but was not legalized in the US until 1992. Other lighting-related lags speciously attributed to cost-effectiveness regulations selectively obeyed by NHTSA are evident in US regulations; for example, virtually every country in the world has since at least the early 1970s required rear turn signals to emit amber light so they can immediately be discerned from adjacent red brake lamps. US regulations still permit rear turn signals to emit red light, citing the same cost-effectiveness regulations that were deliberately disregarded when airbags were mandated.  NHTSA also administers the controversial Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) program. The Wall Street Journal and others have argued that this program distorts market incentives, forcing people to buy smaller, less safe vehicles. CAFE may indeed be a driving factor behind the explosion in demand for SUVs, which are considered "light trucks" for CAFE purposes and therefore do not have to meet the stricter standards for vehicles classified as "cars." The counter argument is that politically reflecting the actual cost of oil and its externalities to the US consumer is not politically feasible.  Aerodynamics brings change to NHTSA  Automakers faced an inherent conflict between NHTSA"s stringent headlight legislation, which froze U.S. headlight technology in 1940, and the Corporate Average Fuel Economy standard, which effectively mandated that automakers develop ways to improve the ability of the car to cleave the air. As a result, in the early 1980s, automakers lobbied for a modification of the mandate for fixed shape sealed-beam headlamps.  NHTSA adopted Ford"s proposal for low-cost aerodynamic headlamps with polycarbonate lenses and transverse-filament bulbs.  For the 1984 model year, Ford introduced the Lincoln Mark VII, the first car since 1939 to be sold in the US market with architectural headlamps as part of its aerodynamic design. These composite headlamps, when new to the U.S. market, were
 首页 上一页  1 2 3