Your tax dollars at work

These guys are true geniuses.
Who'd have thunk it?

Ya think?

These are the same folks who, after extensive study, have decided that getting up in the morning is not more dangerous than staying in bed all day.

I laughed out loud at the absurdity of studying this. Then I tried to figure it out and realized that it's conceivable that kids who can't swim may be likely to carefully stay away from the water, and thus have lower drowning risk than kids who go in the water often and are thus exposed to more opportunity for accidents.

Should dovetail well with: kids who are taught gun-safety are less likely to get shot by one or shoot another kid.

Do you think we'll ever convince them that firearms safety training doesn't increase the risk of accidental shootings?

but the important questions is, do the leasons decrease the drowning risk?

If you read the link they stated that lesson seemed to have a protective component but could not measure it. I.e., only 2 of the people who drowned had lessons, (no statement of how well they swam).

The point that was raised is valid - do parents pay less attention when the kids swim and they are near the water. Basically, are the parents feeling safer because their kids can "swim". Realize they only looking at whether they could swim for 50 feet or one minute. That is a long time/distance for a little kid and if they go out too far they may not be able to get back.

Parents need to be parents and watch at all times!

Rich,

Good point, but the parents should ensure they (the parent)know how to swim as well! Otherwise, I think you better stay close to the lifeguard.

PeterT

Is sex still the leading cause of pregnancy?
I'm on pins and needles waiting for the next government report to come out.

I recall from about 10 years ago that infant swimming lessons seemed to have no positive impact on toddler drownings, so, as Critic above said, the conclusion may not be at all the obvious one.