Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
THE IRISH MEDICAL Journal has recommended that children be taught road safety through virtual reality models.
A study in the January edition of the journal notes that young children “lack the cognitive skills, attention and perception skills to interact safely with road vehicles”.
It states that children “may fail to appreciate the danger associated with fast moving traffic and be unable to integrate speed and distance of vehicles”.
The authors of the study, who examined child road deaths from 1 January 2006 to 31 December 2011, described safety training for children using virtual models as “an exciting new prospect in tackling this problem” without “exposing children to physical traffic hazards”.
The highest proportion of road deaths among children during this six-year period (53%) occurred in the 1-4 year age group.
Between 2006-2008 pedestrian death rates among 0-14 year olds increased (from 0.8 to 1.31 per 100,000). However, from 2009-2011 rates declined (1.06 to 0.41 per 100,000 population).
There was a doubling in the number of road fatalities among children in 2014, with 16 people aged 15 years or less losing their lives in 2014 – eight were pedestrians and eight were passengers.
The authors identified 45 child pedestrian fatalities in the period examined. Traffic related deaths accounted for 58% of all deaths, while non-traffic related deaths represented 42%.
Driveways
Some 68% of non-traffic related deaths were due to low speed vehicle roll-overs. The mean age for this type of death was 21.7 months. In all cases, the cause of death was due to head injuries sustained in the incident.
In 81% of cases the incident took place outside the child’s residence. In 54% of cases the driver of the vehicle was a family member and the vehicle was performing a reverse manoeuvre. Reversal alarms and rear-view cameras are listed as ways in which driveway reversing could be made safer.
The report describes multiple family dwellings, lack of playgrounds, the presence of major roadways, increased traffic levels and roadside parking as “significant risk factors” to children.
In a resource-poor setting, built environment features such as lack of road markings are of relevance. The environmental features that best improve pedestrian safety are the provision of playground or recreation features and traffic calming. These relatively simple interventions have a significant and lasting impact on improving child pedestrian safety at a local level.
The authors also note that increased use of mobile phones could have a negative impact on children’s road crossing abilities as “early research suggests they distract children to a significant degree and may increase their risk of collision”.
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
Should it even be a consideration that the tiger is put down??? It’s not like he lured her in or jumped the fence!
I really think Rosa would agree. May she rest in peace.
@Tony Hartigan: You really think!!! How could you possibly have any idea!?
@Fank Pulman: ur a dope
@Frank Pulman: I imagine she wouldn’t have wanted the tiger to be put down because she devoted her time to them. Seems it was a case of human error.
@Fank Pulman: Because her family said it.
Eh, why would it be put down?
Good ❤️
The tiger has now killed a human being. It is now more likely to try to kill again from a behavioural perspective. Much greater care and fail safes will need to be applied. The risk is greatly increased. The tiger will need much more restrictive enclosure. It might be more humane to have the tiger put to sleep. This is not an argument for revenge. A tiger is a wild and predatory carnivore. The real responsibility lies in a systems failure.
@Tony Daly: The real problem is the failure of humans to protect wildlife and habitat None of these animals should be in a Zoo in the first place. The fact that the tiger killed a person is on us. The tiger is as likely to kill a human as he ever was.
@Jimmy Reinhardt: I agree with your assessment of zoos.
I disagree. Experience in India shows that tigers in the wild engage in repetitive attacks on humans once they have attacked once. The same applies to tigers in captivity. Humans become recognised as available prey.
It is not a good existence for an enclosed tiger. It would be a small mercy to put it out of its misery.
@Tony Daly: total misinformation that the tiger is any more of a risk. Please stop spreading false rubbish just because your lonesome little brain cell thought it up
@Tony Daly: Tony, instead of your vague generalisations about “experience in India” or something you barely remember from The Blue Planet, could you at least provide a link or reference for your “facts”. You do this all the time, coming up with broad musing based on nothing but your personal opinion. It’s becoming very tedious.
There are hundreds of tigers in captivity around the world. Most are part of breeding programs and are on endangered or critically endangered list because their habitat has gone or has shrunk because of human incursion. While, not ideal obviously, it’s better species disappearing altogether.
@Tony Daly: humane? To kill? No what’s inhimane is to lock up a wild animal in a tiny enclosure. What would be humane is to never have put it in that position in the first place
@Samuel K Toland: There are no tiny enclosures anymore. certainly not in any accredited zoos. Whilst not ideal, it’s better than extinction, don’t you think?
Just don’t get in the fookin cage
@Tony Daly: Tiger Expert everybody make way.
It saddens me that the zookeeper’s story got 7 comments in a week while the tiger for 23 comments in an hour. Don’t get me wrong- this is a wild animal doing what wild animals do so I don’t wish it dead but it’s sad the people care more about the animal than a human.
@Louise: Yes because we care too much. Isn’t it evident with how we treat the planet. Poor endangered humans though. They don’t get a break
This was considered?! Putting down a tiger for being a….tiger
If you go surfing in a shark hotspot and get bitten you don’t kill the shark. If you stroll through the African plains and get eaten by a lion, you don’t kill the lion. If you torment and bull in a ring and get your stupid arse impaled…you get the point!
@Psyarron: they generally will hunt for and kill the shark
@Dark Knight: I can just picture them looking really hard and pointing at some shark saying ah that’s him let’s blow its brains out.
@Psyarron: in India, if a tiger turns to hunting humans it will be tracked/trapped and put down. As tony pointed out, it may now reasise keepers can double up as food. This Can potentially be a problem.
@Psyarron: Sharks will be hunted in an area where a human has been killed , and if they find more than one that fits the bill , they will kill them all just to make sure .
Man eating lions will be killed or at least moved to another area away from humans .
Worrying that it would even be considered. It’s not like the idea of a Tiger being a threat to humans should be news to anyone.
Great news. It’s a lion not a household pet. It’s up to us to be responsible around them if we insist on keeping them in captivity
Should a killer pitbull be put down for killing a child – seeing it, naturally, as a threat. Or maybe just permanently fenced in/incarcerated?
@Paul Foot: You can’t compare a domesticated animal like a dog to a wild animal like a tiger. There are pit bulls everywhere and why should they find a child a threat? I wouldn’t be surprised if on the occasions of a pit bull attack the dog was being trained for fights.
@Paul Foot: what a simpleton
@Gary: Your surprise – or lack of – is irrelevant. Pitbulls are domesticated and often become jealous of children being prioitised. My question is whether an offending/domesticated pitbull should be put down, incarcerated or allowed to live normally.
@Paul Foot: Good point and simple answer. Any animal that kills a human being should be put down – in case it does it again!!
@Paul Foot: that is an ignorant comment
@Tony Hartigan: Which one!?
@Fank Pulman: I see you’re answering yourself again. Fank Pulman AKA as Paul Foot AKA as Pendragon 917.
@Paul Foot: paul foot talking to himself again. How sad.
If she didn’t enter the cage so provocatively, giving the tiger the wrong idea he would never have attacked her. He can’t be held responsible, it’s in his nature.
The tiger shouldn’t as it didn’t choose to be caged, t was an awful incident but that is the nature of that beast. The animal didn’t invade the human area, the humans invaded the animals area?
Don’t kill him. Just take his teeth out and paint his gums white.
have your say