> I just said it's not helpful to consumers, because it doesn't actually help them make a better decision when you don't know if the brand is more or less safe

> I just said it's not helpful to consumers, because it doesn't actually help them make a better decision when you don't know if the brand is more or less safe than the alternatives. I agree. But I am confused why this lack of statistics is the journalist's fault instead of either the manufacturer who has is sitting on the information, or lack of regulatory rigor that could force public disclosure. You haven't proposed how the journalist gets this proprietary information? Only that they should sit down and be quiet until they have it somehow. If your point is that all manufacturers should disclose, so we can compare/contrast, I agree entirely. But it comes across more like you think journalists shouldn't report on problems if the people they're reporting on aren't cooperating vis-a-vis full disclosure. Which is tantamount to the end of investigative journalism.