Brain-Injury Studies Are No Thrill for Fun Parks

Short of a public blowup between Mickey Mouse and Goofy, I can’t imagine anything amusement park execs would rather read about less than possible links between brain injuries and park rides.

Surely it’s not the kind of thing Disney’s Imagineers could build an ad campaign around, unless it were something like, “Come to Disneyland, Minimal Threat of Brain Damage!”

Yet that was the unwelcome prospect that greeted the amusement park industry last week. The nonprofit Brain Injury Assn. in Alexandria, Va., says it will examine 30 to 50 cases in which amusement park customers are alleged to have suffered brain injuries after going on a ride.

The reported injuries ranged from headaches to ruptured aneurysms. A rather wide range, I’d say, but I’m no doctor.

“If we can prevent one potential brain injury, that’s worth doing,” the association’s president told The Times last week.

“For us, this [study] is an opportunity to see if there’s anything substantive here.”

That no doubt left the public relations people at America’s amusement parks with headaches of their own.

If that weren’t enough, the amusement park people also began digesting a new report from the Consumer Product Safety Commission.

For the year 2000, at both fixed-site parks--like Knott’s Berry Farm and Disneyland--and traveling carnivals, the commission estimated that rides were linked to 10,580 emergency room-treated injuries.

Commission Chairwoman Ann Brown said fixed-site parks should be subject to federal safety laws, as are traveling shows, according to Reuters news agency. Brown also suggested her panel be given up to $5 million to regulate fixed-site parks.

That suggestion makes the amusement park industry more nauseated than back-to-back rides on Space Mountain. Its spokesmen greeted the commission’s estimates with some skepticism and repeated its long-standing contention that the chances of being injured at an amusement park are minuscule.

I know, this goes round and round. I don’t know whose figures or analyses are correct.

What piques my interest, however, are the soundings from the brain-injury association. Yes, their concerns may ultimately disappear as fast as your cash at Disneyland.

But the what-ifs for places like Disneyland or Magic Mountain range from insignificant to monumental.

What if some future study makes a plausible connection between roller coasters and some level of brain injuries? Obviously, we’d be talking about a tiny percentage of park patrons, but the public relations impact could be damaging.

Or what if somewhere down the road, the federal government decided it needed to regulate amusement park rides because of safety concerns? Would park officials reverse the current trend and start reducing the thrill-seeker quotient of new rides? And if it did, would people still come?

Let’s face it, people don’t go to Disneyland for the chicken. They go, among other things, for the Indiana Jones ride--the focal point of two lawsuits recently settled over brain injuries allegedly linked to the wild ride. Disneyland didn’t acknowledge fault in the settlements and insists the ride is safe.

Still, rest assured that neither Disneyland nor any other American amusement park wants people conducting brain-injury studies.

Before you throw away your Disneyland annual pass, please note that nobody is yet systematically connecting roller coasters with brain injuries.

The Brain Injury Assn. says its study will be unbiased. But it’s a given that if it shows any credible medical links between park rides and brain injuries, Congress will take notice.

Amusement parks sell thrills. They sell a whiff of danger and risk. They know how to market that.

But the public relations person hasn’t been born who can sell brain damage.

*

Dana Parsons’ column appears Wednesdays, Fridays and Sundays. Readers may reach Parsons by calling (714) 966-7821; by writing to him at The Times’ Orange County edition, 1375 Sunflower Ave., Costa Mesa, CA 92626; or by e-mail at dana.parsons@latimes.com.