Categories
Computers

Britax Willow SC Review: A Fantastic Stroller and Car Seat Combo

[ad_1]

Everyone tells you how tired you’ll be with a newborn, but take it from someone with a 3-month-old: It’s more than you can anticipate before having kids, unless you were previously an ultramarathoner and/or offshore oil rig worker.

When you’re putting your freshly baked human into a car seat, stroller, or generally taking it anywhere with you (which you have to do, apparently), you don’t just want the process to be easy; you need the process to be easy. That’s why I’ve fallen in love with the Britax Willow Grove SC travel system.

This car seat base, car seat, stroller, and stroller base all come in a package together, and everything just works. There are no tricks for installation or daily use. Anyone can easily figure out how to use every part of these things, even when you haven’t slept in days. Just click your little one into either the stroller or car seat attachment, fold up the wheeled base with one hand, and you’re off to wherever you need to go. The price you pay for this system is about $100 higher than you might pay for another all-in-one option from Chicco, but the build quality and ease of use is well worth the extra cost.

Getting Loaded

The most important thing for any newborn is a quality car seat and base; the hospital literally checked that we had ours installed before they allowed us to leave. There aren’t any official safety ratings for this system, but the National Highway Traffic and Safety Administration recommends rear-facing seats like this for infants. I grew up (and later babysat) in a time when you had to take your car to the fire department to install your car seat base permanently in the back seat until a child was old enough to not need it, so color me excited when I realized how easy the Britax base was going to be to install.

Black base for a car set installed in the back seat of a car with straps and buckles

Photograph: Parker Hall

Simply click the two hooks around the now-standard child seat restraint area on your car’s seats (two hooks that often hide behind the cushions), put the seat belt through the company’s proprietary ClickTight Installation system, and press down. It all tightens in place easily, taking about 30 seconds to install. Once you’ve done it one time, swapping between cars is a breeze. No need to own two bases for different cars/friends/family.

Clicking the actual car seat into the base is also a breeze; it just clicks right in, with a handle on the forward side of the carrier (where your baby’s back faces) that easily allows you to detach it with one hand as your other grabs the handle of the carrier. Apart from the weight of your baby (we have a lunker!), it’s extremely wieldy and convenient.

I like that there are little plastic tabs on the left and right sides of the car seat you can use to hold the straps while you place your baby’s butt in the seat. This makes it super easy to then click your baby in place with the three-piece click harness and to cinch them in with the strap between their legs.

On a Stroll

The best part of the car seat is that it easily clicks in and attaches to the foldable stroller base, which means you don’t have to transfer a sleeping kid to a stroller seat when you want to roll them somewhere fresh out of the car. This is awesome, especially because the foldable stroller section can easily be deployed one-handed, thanks to a simple hook-to-hold mechanism on the outside of the right rear wheel pole. You just unhook the plastic piece that’s holding the stroller folded, and gravity does the rest.

Left Baby stroller frame upright on the sidewalk. Right Baby stroller frame folded sitting on the ground

Photograph: Parker Hall

[ad_2]

Source Article Link

Categories
Life Style

US COVID-origins hearing puts scientific journals in the hot seat

[ad_1]

rad Wenstrup speaks with Raul Ruiz during a hearing of the House Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Crisis

Brad Wenstrup (right), a Republican from Ohio who chairs the Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic, speaks with Raul Ruiz (left), a Democrat from California who is ranking member of the subcommittee.Credit: Al Drago/Bloomberg/Getty

During a public hearing in Washington DC today, Republicans in the US House of Representatives alleged that government scientists unduly influenced the editors of scientific journals and that, in turn, those publications stifled discourse about the origins of the COVID-19 pandemic. Democrats clapped back, lambasting their Republican colleagues for making such accusations without adequate evidence and for sowing distrust of science.

The session is the latest in a series of hearings held by the Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic to explore where the SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus came from, despite a lack of any new scientific evidence. Scientists have for some time been arguing over whether the virus spread naturally, from animals to people, or whether it leaked from a laboratory in Wuhan, China. Some have alleged that in the early days of the pandemic, government scientists Anthony Fauci, former director of the US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, and Francis Collins, former director of the US National Institutes of Health (NIH), steered the scientific community, including journals, to dismiss the lab-leak hypothesis.

During the pandemic, “rather than journals being a wealth of information”, they instead “put a chilling effect on scientific research regarding the origins of COVID-19”, Brad Wenstrup, a Republican representative from Ohio who is chair of the subcommittee, said at the hearing. Raul Ruiz, a Democratic representative from California who is the ranking member of the subcommittee, shot back: “Congress should not be meddling in the peer-review process, and it should not be holding hearings to throw around baseless accusations.”

Holden Thorp, editor-in-chief of the Science family of journals in Washington DC, appeared before the committee to deny the suggestion that he had been coerced or censored by government scientists.

The subcommittee also invited Magdalena Skipper, Nature’s editor-in-chief, and Richard Horton, editor-in-chief of the medical journal The Lancet, to appear, but neither was present. Skipper was absent owing to scheduling conflicts, but a spokesperson for Springer Nature says the company is “committed to remaining engaged with the Subcommittee and to assisting in its inquiry”. (Nature’s news team is editorially independent of its journals team and of its publisher, Springer Nature.) The Lancet did not respond to requests for comment.

Academic influence?

This is not the first time that Republicans have accused members of the scientific community of colluding with Fauci and Collins. Evolutionary biologist Kristian Andersen and virologist Robert Garry appeared before the same subcommittee on 11 July last year to deny allegations that the officials prompted them to publish a commentary in Nature Medicine1 in March 2020 concluding that SARS-CoV-2 showed no signs of genetic engineering. They wrote in the journal that they did not “believe that any type of laboratory-based scenario is plausible” for the virus’s origins.

Portrait of Holden Thorp

Holden Thorp became editor-in-chief of the Science family of journals in 2019.Credit: Steve Exum

Some lab-leak proponents have suggested, without evidence, that the pandemic began because the NIH funded risky coronavirus research at a lab in Wuhan, offering a motive for Collins and Fauci to promote a natural origin for COVID-19.

During the latest hearing, Republicans went a step further to suggest that not only did Collins and Fauci influence prominent biologists, but that they also encouraged journals to publish research supporting the natural-origin hypothesis. This accusation is based on e-mails that Wenstrup says the subcommittee obtained showing communication between top journal editors and government scientists. Thorp forcefully denied this line of questioning. “No government officials prompted or participated in the review or editing” of two key papers2,3 on COVID-19’s origins published in Science, he testified. “Any papers supporting the lab-origin theory would go through the very same processes” of peer review as any other paper, he said.

Thorp otherwise spent much of the 80-minute hearing answering questions about how a scientific manuscript is prepared for publication, what a preprint is and how peer review works. In a tense moment, Wenstrup questioned a social-media post on Thorp’s personal X (formerly Twitter) page, in which he downplayed the lab-leak hypothesis. Thorp called the post “flippant” and apologised.

Communication queries

Correspondence between journal editors and government scientists is to be expected, Deborah Ross, a Democratic representative from North Carolina, said at the hearing. “Government actors querying academia on issues that are academic in nature isn’t malpractice or unlawful — it’s just doing their jobs.”

Anita Desikan, a senior analyst at the Union of Concerned Scientists who is based in Washington DC and focuses on scientific integrity, tells Nature’s news team that it is customary for government agencies to reach out to stakeholders to inform policy decisions. Even if a government scientist suggests an idea for a journal paper, “that doesn’t mean it will be published or receive praise from the scientific community”.

Roger Pielke Jr, a science-policy researcher at the University of Colorado Boulder, who was originally slated to testify before the subcommittee until his invitation was rescinded owing to logistical reasons, disagrees. He thinks that Fauci and Collins still shaped the Nature Medicine COVID-19 origins paper by recommending that specific scientists investigate and by offering advice along the way. Nevertheless, the hearing was a “dud”, Pielke Jr says, because Thorp was the wrong witness. Instead, a more relevant witness would have been a government scientific-integrity officer who is more knowledgeable about what constitutes an ethical breach, he adds.

[ad_2]

Source Article Link

Categories
Entertainment

Uber will start reminding passengers to wear their seat belt

[ad_1]

Starting today, the Uber app will remind you to put on your seatbelt shortly after your ride starts. Passengers’ tendency to not use a seat belt remains a significant concern, the ride-hailing service wrote in its announcement of the new safety feature, even though 50 percent of all vehicle crash deaths in the US in 2022 was caused by their non-usage. Now, your driver’s phone will issue an audio reminder when you hop on, telling you to “Please use your seat belt for your safety.” You’ll also get a push notification on your phone at the same time that says: “Even on a short ride and seated in the back, use a seat belt for safety.”

The company first started testing audio seat belt alerts in 2021 based on feedback from drivers. It said at the time that it believes the alerts will “increase seat belt use and help drivers ensure a safe environment while on a trip.” This rollout makes it widely available in the US, UK, Taiwan, Latin America, as well as several countries in Africa. Uber intends to bring it to more territories in the future.

The feature will only be enabled for your first five trips after the feature launches. Uber is likely hoping you’ll get used to putting your seat belt on after those first five times, though it will send you a notification every 10th trip thereafter. The company also recently launched a new safety preferences section where you can find and automate the service’s safety tools. From there, you can automatically switch on features like audio recording, PIN verification, RideCheck and Share My Trip.

A screenshot of a phone screen with an Uber notification reminding the user to put on their seat belt.A screenshot of a phone screen with an Uber notification reminding the user to put on their seat belt.

Uber

[ad_2]

Source Article Link