In a message dated 4/7/02 6:38:18 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
andrew.grebneff@STONEBOW.OTAGO.AC.NZ writes:

> I would be a bit uncomfortable with the remark about supporting the <<..small
> >of my neck...>> with a head restraint. Where would the crown of your neck
> >rest in that situation?
> >
> >It is my understanding that these are headrestraints and not headrests. It
> is
> >also my understanding that they are most effective if the crown of your
> head
> >makes contact with the restraint in the event of a rear end collision.
> That's
> >one of the known ways to prevent whiplash. Now if one were to improperly
> >mount a headrestraint such as the neck is contacted first before the crown
> of
> >the head which is much harder, it would seem that this will amplify any
> >chance of neck injury.
> >
> >Whaddoyouthink?
> >
> >BenT
>
> DEAD right. They ARE correctly called restraints, not rests. And
> setting one low enough that your neck rests against it is likely to
> result in a broken neck in even a mild rear-end impact.
> --
>

i'd drive a '2002 crown victoria land yacht with dual airbags if i was THAT
concerned about safety..i wouldnt drive a vanagon which has no protection in
the front.
the merkur headrests are similar to the jetta/golf/passat/etc, etc headrests.
 i can ajust them to fit the back of my head, my top of my head, my neck, or
whatever.  i was just adjusting them for comfort. which on a long trip i'd
rather have.
  i also ride around without my seatbelt on too.    and i run with scissors...
  chris