!! spellx done
214  Flameproofing Children's Cotton Nighties
     The Washington Post  Saturday, June 20, 1970
     
     Children's nighties are unlikely subjects for a study that
illuminates the tensions of technology and free enterprise.  Such a
study has, however, become a matter of urgent public concern with the
shocking realization that thousands of children are badly burned each
year from clothing that has caught fire.

     These injuries, it may be argued, are inherently preventable by
regulations that would bar flammable fabrics from the market.  At the
present time, children's clothing is especially vulnerable because of
our taste for lightweight, fluffy garments in gaily colored cotton
flannels.

     However, we must not simply substitute one hazard to another.  A
law that might forbid putting clothes on children to lower the risk of
burning is a caricature illustrating the kind of trade-off that must,
at some point, be considered even when something as precious as a
child's life is at stake.

     The job of setting legal standards is much more difficult than
reaching a determination that children ought not to be imperiled.  The
problem has been reviewed recently by Dr. Myron Tribus, Assistant 
Secretary of Commerce for Science and Technology, who brings to an 
important administrative role in government an unusual background and 
reputation in the mathematical theory of risk and decision analysis. (He
was formerly Dean of the Dartmouth Engineering School.)

     Most systems analysts suffer from a disease called 
"suboptimization."  They become so enthralled by a limited part of a 
real-world problem that can be analyzed mathematically that they may end
up generating splendid solutions to a narrow problem while immeasurably
worsening another.  Dr. Tribus' clarity and humility in framing what
can be accomplished with quantitative standards make him stand out in
his profession, and add greater weight to his analysis.

     If fabrics could be flameproofed at a negligible cost, there
would be no difficulty about regulatory standards.  The costs are in
fact substantial in relation to the price levels in a low-technology,
mass-market, competitive industry.  Even the cost of testing and 
quality control will bear heavily on the economics of such an industry,
and especially on the smaller producers.

     It is easy to recognize an extreme of dangerous flammability, but
whatever standard is adopted must bear a real relationship to human
hazard and must be accessible to objective tests.  Under the stress of
price competition, the producers will inevitably press hard on the
standards.  Flameproofing a fabric, furthermore, interferes with other
consumer values like durability, style color and washability.

     We could then get into an interminable argument about how much a
child's life is worth in terms of a company's profits.  Instead, Dr.
Tribus points out that this question is actually answered by the 
consumer public.

     If flameproofed clothing for children is too costly, mothers will
make their own from unregulated bolt cloth or by converting other 
garments. Some "reasonable" price must then be negotiated for the value
of flameproofing to deal even with the isolated problem of minimizing
accidental burns.

     The cost of flameproofing  to a reasonable standard may not be
all that prohibitive.  Many children may be saved by the early adoption
of a useful criterion of safety as an interim measure.  To guarantee
that no child is ever burned has been impossible since primitive man
discovered fire.

     There is, nevertheless, much to do, both in textile chemistry and
in other areas like safety education and the social control of napalm,
to help minimize such tragedies.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------