[resizeitplz]

Fwiw, I agree (mostly) with you (and don't understand the tone of this comment section... at ... all.. ).

- Would either either a recall or an offer of free child-safety package be a nice brand-repairing option? yes. - Should we regulate the industry for one company's lack thereof? no.

I must be getting old. All I could think when reading this thread was, "This is why we can't have nice things". What if you want to buy an aesthetically (maybe even functionally) pleasing, but unsafe-if-misused device? Why must we optimize for child safety, when a modicum of awareness/prevention and/or training would suffice?

A better comparison than razor blades: motorcycles. In most states, if a child isn't required to be in a safety seat, they aren't prohibited from being a motorcycle passenger - despite it being statistically less safe than any car.

[dlp211]

The difference is because you have to make an active decision to put the child on the motorcycle. No parent is deciding to put their child under the any treadmill. And no other treadmills suffer from this issue. Also, there is no reason that this treadmill can't be safe and remain aesthetically pleasing, you produced a false dichotomy.

[tw04]

I posted two links to other treadmills that suffer from this exact issue. The fact you fail to acknowledge that just re-affirms my point that people are either intentionally or unintentionally being ignorant to the fact that ALL treadmills are dangerous for children and nothing about Peloton is unique beyond the fact they're a popular name so they get headlines.

The tread was released in 2019. The CSPC reported 30 deaths from 2017-2019 from treadmills, none of which we peloton (I've yet to be able to find details beyond that on those deaths) - so to say this is a Peloton problem is not accurate or even a little bit fair.