Cutting Through The Fat - Obese Drivers 80% More Likely To Die In Crashes

You would have thought the opposite would be the case, what with all the extra cushioning available. Sort of like extra airbags.

Nice cup holder.

That's funny there.

Great, so not only do these fat people drive bigger cars that destroy smaller more economical cars as the two collides, the fat drivers themselves also die. So much for the reasoning for building/buying these behemoths. They're heavier, consumes more fuel, takes up more parking space, more dangerous due to false sense of confidence, yet still don't protect the bigger fatter drivers. The only reason for their being that still rings true is that they can accommodate their bigger fatter drivers; or put it another way, a bigger coffin. I'm not revealing my feeling towards these SUVs do I?

You are the Smartest person I have ever seen post on this website full of truck driving macho dummies!

did you read the article? No where in there did it try to relate larger people to larger vehicles. Even the picture in the article has a fat slob Brit in a small sedan smoking a cigarette. Here in the US, most large people I see are in similar cars as pictured in the link because they are too large to make the climb up into a truck or SUV. Might want to read the article before going off on a tangent that has nothing to do with the study detailed in the article. If you want, it can be summarized with one quote,

"Edmund King, president of the AA, said broadly speaking cars were designed to cater for the average male occupant and the study findings suggested this could lead to disadvantages for fatter drivers."

As for the eurotrash carsmart, who drives a truck? Only reason I would even consider one is that I know how much it gets under your skin.

Also... realizing that a large car could cause more damage to a "smaller more economical" car, it isn't like a prius would fare well when it collides with another prius. If anything, it's just more batteries to dispose of... those plastic bumpers barely hold up to wind resistance much less an impact... Oh and then you have to make more unecofriendly plastic pieces and styrofoam to repair it so... it's really a moot point. An accident is an accident and resources are wasted. It's fat people that are the problem here.

trmckin, do not make fun of your intellectual superiors. We are willing to draw a connection between obese people, their need for SUV/Trucks and the unsafeness of larger vehicles.

As I said before, obsese/excess food should be combatted. People getting wider/taller is only a waste of Earths finite resources. Only small people should be allowed to reproduce.

Intellectual superiors would actually read the article and combat my post with facts. Something you've failed to do over and over again. As for the food thing... if you honestly believe the things you say, I recommend you check yourself into the nearest mental institution for an exam. People should live healthy no doubt but your ideas about making people smaller is hilarious. Your theory is already garbage. My mom is 5 ft 1 in and my dad is 5 ft 7 in tall. Both active and healthy weight. I'm 6 ft 3 in tall and almost underweight at 185 lbs for my height. So much for your theory. On another note, did you see this smarteuro car Mercedes is kicking out??!?!

http://www.edmunds.com/car-news/mercedes-benz-g63-amg-6x6-six-wheel-debuts.html

trmckin, moot means debatable. Look it up.

trmckin, if you are as tall as you say, you should not reproduce. Making the world taller leads to more use of resources. Under my plan, you would be paided a monthy amount to be sterilized.

2ndbimmer, it also means it's an irrelevant argument. The way I used it is to mean that it is of no importance.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/moot+point

If you need me to look up any other definitions for you, let me know.

1CarSmart1, unfortunately for you and your plan, I've already had 2 children. But hey, since you are trying to start a new breed of human being like Hitler was, they both have blonde hair and blue eyes.

trmckin - show me fat people driving small cars. Why do you think trucks and SUV are in high demand here in the US (and only in the US)? Do you even step foot outside of the US? Just walk down the street in any city outside of the US and you'll see the low % of fat and obese people vs the US scenery. Our food portion is bigger so we're fat because we can't/won't listen to the rest of the world, we don't have the self discipline so we hide behind our "rights to live the way we do", and we pay for it in terms of poor health, reliance on diet fads and drugs, driving gas guzzlers that, as the article indicates, we have a higher probably of dying in.

You missed my point. That point being that article did not make reference to vehicle size and in fact, it pictured a fat guy in a little vehicle. As for the US, I'm well aware of the weight problems that face our nation. I'm glad to live in Colorado where it's not as big of a problem but it's still an issue for many. The issue here in the article is FAT people. Not vehicle size. The way you commented, it looked like you didn't even read the article. Couple that with 1CarSmart1's idiotic rant about population size control and well... you get internet trolling at it's finest. Not your comment but his...

As for fat people driving small cars, maybe they just stick out to me more but I see it very frequently. Trucks and SUV's have some correlation to fat people and as a result they buy them. However, I think the large part of their popularity is that gives people a false sense of security by being in a bigger vehicle. Gas being as cheap as it used to be only made the situation worse. If you can drive around something larger and more comfortable in an affordable manner, most would choose that route. Fat or skinny... End of the day, automakers are having to change. All the teeth grinding over inefficient vehicles is slowly changing and consumers have good options now. Belly aching over it constantly is useless...

trmckin, I hope your wife is short and that your children will be healthy small adults. Downsizing people is a holistic approach that not only solves transport problems, but food/housing and natural resources problems. This is my field of research, for which I have received government grant, so I have some idea what I am talking about!

Well, you aren't the first case of bad government spending in history. The U.S. government spent $175,587 “to determine if cocaine makes Japanese quail engage in sexually risky behavior”. I'd list your study in sort of category.

As for healthy children, they are very healthy. My wife is taller than average at 5 ft 8 in. Believe it or not, her grandmother is about 5 ft 10 and she's going strong at 96 years old so your crackpot study is wasted on my family. Living a healthy and active lifestyle is key. Height has nothing to do with it. Play with your holistic (Hitler) like approach all you want. It won't change anything. Calorie intake for someone that is 6 ft versus that of someone that is 5 1/2 ft is not that different and varies person to person. It's all about eating healthy and staying in shape. As for you knowing what you are talking about... well... I'd give you an ounce of credibility if you used phrases like "studies have shown" and then cite the published work. You continue to fail to back up anything you claim and you also continue to ignore the short comings of your fellow Europeans when it comes to responsible auto manufacturing. You sound like you are angry for being short.

I'm thinking he found out about the shoe size rumor and now he's out to get those of us that aren't vertically challenged ;) Every comment he makes has some reference to size.

You want me to cite research? Fine I will.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2114430/Save-planet-genetically-engineering-humans-smaller-suggests-NYU-philosopher.html?ITO=1490

And shame on you for mating with an above avergae height woman.

I evened it out with your mother.

Did you even read your own article?

"But Liao and his co-writers, Anders Sandberg and Rebecca Roache, stress that they are not advocating any of these approaches, just offering them up for discussion as to the pros and cons, and they also stressed their support for individual choice."

Even they know it's extreme and not a solution for everyone. You really need to take the blinders off and realize that not everyone is as crazy as you are.

Of course I read the article. The technical paper is not available as a hyperlink, and the DNA science is over your head so I must rely on a dumb-downed version that injects opinion. Just because you haven't heard much about something does not mean it does not exist. Maybe not in your lifetime, but youre children may be required to have DNA altered children that will not consume as many world resources.

I believe the stealthy jet plane was flying for a decade before the average dumb american knew it existed. DNA mods are coming.

Boo global warming.