I got to page vi... and found the first typo. "Visit the our website...." sigh, okay. I suspect spell check could have helped, but we've all been there.
While the authors cover ABS vs non-ABS cars, they have not heard of side impact airbags, and state on page 100 that airbags will not help in a side impact collision. Well, front airbags won't help, but side ones, I'm pretty sure, that's what they're designed for.
I know driver's ed is not the place to talk about physics, that physics is not a core competency of the Department of Licensing, and that more than 1/2 of the kids taking driver's ed will never take physics. But, can we at least not use misleading language in describing physical things in the book? A side impact collision does not throw the passengers into the sides of the car. A side impact moves the side of the car into the passenger or, actually, depending on the location of the impact relative to the passenger, the impact will move the car away from the passenger. Car hits car transferring momentum. Because we're only sort of connected to the car, the transfer doesn't go directly to us, so we don't start moving with the car until we fill out the slack in the seat belts, and in our guts. Then because we are lighter than the car, when we "hit" the interior of the car, or end of the slack in the seat belts, we bounce off. I know, I know, technicalities. But seriously - must we be misleading when we can be accurate without getting into physics?
Same page... they state, unless you're involved in an accident, don't stop unless no emergency help has not yet arrived. So, everyone passing an accident should stop until emergency personnel have arrived? That doesn't work. And, how about explicitly stating that if you witness an accident, you should stop. Based on the number of signs and ads I see asking for accident witnesses, it might be worth mentioning.
Now... let's get clear about core competencies. Just like physics isn't a core competency, DOL should probably consider not giving first aid advice. Or at least, running their information by someone qualified. Putting your hand directly on an open wound - page 102 - to directly apply pressure, is a bad idea for patient and responder. First - for the patient... when you remove your hand, the bleeding will start again even if you did get it to stop without some fabric in there. Second, for the responder, say together people: blood born diseases. While most are treatable, many are not curable. Hep C, and AIDS, just to start the list. It's really better to get anything between that wound and you hand. Clean towel on the wound, and a gloves on your hands, perfect. Reasonably not disgusting piece of any fabric on the wound, and a plastic garbage bag or ski glove on your hand, better than nothing. But get a piece of fabric in there. The blood collecting in a piece of fabric over the wound actually affects the osmotic pressure in the wound and aids in coagulation. Somebody's sock is better than nothing.
I could go on. But, that's enough free consulting.
