221. How Did the Belt Win?

Suspenders may work better, but the dork factor is too high. How did an organ-squeezing belly tourniquet become part of our everyday wardrobe -- and what other suboptimal solutions do we routinely put up with?

Speaker names marked ? are inferred from speaking time and the show’s known hosts — they are not voice-verified.

• 0:01Stephen J. Dubner?

  Freakonomics Radio is sponsored by Progressive. Whoever says saving money is hard doesn't know that new customers who bundle and save with Progressive save hundreds because switching your home and auto insurance is better than cutting down on the things you love, like those iced lattes that help you get ready to face the day. So switch your home and auto to Progressive and see if you could save and keep sipping away. Get your quote today at progressive.com. Progressive Casualty Insurance Company affiliates and other insurers. Not available in all states. Freakonomics Radio is sponsored by PNC Bank. Boring. Great word, bad rep. Yet, time and time again, here at Freakonomics, we find that when something culture-changing happens,

• 0:43Stephen J. Dubner?

  boring things like calculations and careful planning are usually behind it. Which begs the question, why not apply it to other aspects of life, like banking, for example? Well, PNC Bank did since its inception, proving time and again that the best banking strategy isn't the exciting type, but the steady, reliable, definitely not YOLO type. PNC Bank. Brilliantly boring since 1865. Brilliantly boring since 1865 is a registered mark of the PNC Financial Services Group, Inc. PNC Bank, National Association, Member, FDIC. Freakonomics Radio is sponsored by Mint Mobile. With Mint Mobile's summer sale, all of Mint's

• 1:25Stephen J. Dubner?

  plans are $15 per month, even unlimited. Free yourself from big wireless and switch to Mint for high-speed data and coverage on the T-Mobile 5G network. To get your new wireless plan for just $15 a month, go to mintmobile.com/freak. That's mintmobile.com/freak. Upfront payment $45 for three months, $90 for six months, or $180 for 12 months. Plan required. $15 per month equivalent. Taxes and fees extra. Initial plan term only. Greater than 50GB may slow when network is busy. Includes up to 20GB hotspot. Capable device required. Availability, speed, and coverage varies. See mintmobile.com.

• 2:11Stephen J. Dubner?

  Freakonomics Radio is sponsored by ChatGPT. ChatGPT Work is a new way to work in ChatGPT. ChatGPT Work can pull info from across your apps and connect to your tools to help you create finished work. You can even automate work in ChatGPT with the Scheduled Tasks feature, and the whole time, you stay in control. Put ChatGPT to work on your most ambitious ideas and projects. Get started at chatgpt.com by selecting Work Mode, available on Plus and Pro plans.

• 2:53Stephen J. Dubner?

  You ever notice something that is so commonly used that it's practically ubiquitous, even though it doesn't work all that well? We get used to things, but does that mean they really make sense? I'm sure some examples come to your mind, maybe some medical practice, maybe a political practice, maybe even something where the stakes are really high, like, hmm, belts?

• 3:22Stephen J. Dubner?

  So Levitt, list for me, if you would, all the accessories and items of, let's say, jewelry that you wear in a given day.

• 3:31Speaker 01

  You include a belt?

• 3:33Stephen J. Dubner?

  Sure, let's include a belt.

• 3:35Speaker 01

  Okay, a belt.

• 3:39Speaker 01

  Yeah, I've never worn a watch. I've never worn jewelry. I don't.

• 3:44Stephen J. Dubner?

  No cravat?

• 3:45Speaker 01

  No.

• 3:46Stephen J. Dubner?

  You ever wear a pocket square?

• 3:49Speaker 01

  I've never worn, in my life, I don't think I've ever had a pocket square, and I certainly have never worn a pocket watch.

• 3:56Stephen J. Dubner?

  Cufflinks?

• 3:58Speaker 01

  Only when forced to on tuxedo days.

• 4:02Stephen J. Dubner?

  And so for someone who wears no sartorial accessories, why the belt?

• 4:09Speaker 01

  Boy, you've left me speechless. I don't know why I wear a belt.

• 4:13Stephen J. Dubner?

  That's Steve Levitt, my Freakonomics friend and co-author. Now, you'd think when I asked Levitt why he wears a belt, he'd give the obvious answer: to hold up his pants. That's what a belt's for, isn't it? Or is it? The late comedian Mitch Hedberg once wrestled with this question.

• 4:29Speaker 02

  I got a belt on that's holding up my pants, and my pants have belt loops that hold up my belt. I don't know what's really happening down there. Who is the real hero?

• 4:40Stephen J. Dubner?

  On today's episode, we too will wrestle with this and even more pressing questions about the belt. Hey, don't laugh it off. There are health implications.

• 4:50Speaker 03

  Around the pelvis, there is a nerve that lives there called the lateral femoral cutaneous nerve.

• 4:58Stephen J. Dubner?

  There are economic implications.

• 5:00Speaker 04

  So we believed that this was a sleeping giant of a market.

• 5:03Stephen J. Dubner?

  There are, of course, aesthetic implications.

• 5:06Speaker 04

  You look ridiculous if you wear a tucked-in shirt without a belt.

• 5:09Stephen J. Dubner?

  And we look at another solution to another problem, one that really is life and death, that just about everyone believes in, even though they probably shouldn't.

• 5:18Speaker 01

  And what we found in the data was really remarkable. The facts and the mythology just didn't seem to line up very well at all.

• 5:33Speaker 05

  From WNYC, this is Freakonomics Radio, the podcast that explores the hidden side of everything. Here's your host, Stephen Dubner.

• 5:47Stephen J. Dubner?

  The conventional wisdom seems to hold that wearing a belt is the right thing to do, for at least two obvious reasons. Number one, utility.

• 5:55Speaker 06

  I mean, well, I am a belt person because it does help, you know, keep up the trousers, you know?

• 6:01Speaker 07

  They're needed if you can't keep your pants up.

• 6:03Speaker 06

  I always wear trousers that are a bit too big, so if I don't wear a belt, I'm in trouble.

• 6:09Stephen J. Dubner?

  And reason number two, style.

• 6:12Speaker 08

  I love belts. I wear belts all the time. I think they complete an outfit.

• 6:15Speaker 09

  Yes, I always wear belts. They look good. I got a belt on right now. I wear belts like pretty much every day. I'd feel like naked if I wasn't wearing it.

• 6:23Stephen J. Dubner?

  So there's a lot of pro-belt sentiment out there, a lot of belt wearers, a lot of belt lovers.

• 6:30Stephen J. Dubner?

  Let me get this right out in the open. I am not among them. I don't like belts very much. I don't think they work very well. I find them uncomfortable. I'm always reminded of this on the rare occasions that I do wear a belt when I take it off at the end of the day and instantly feel much better. So I was happy to have a conversation with someone who feels the same way.

• 6:50Speaker 10

  For me, it really started back in about 2010 when I was teaching physics in high school.

• 6:59Stephen J. Dubner?

  That's Daniel Seftick.

• 7:00Speaker 10

  I am a data admin for Newbold Advisors as well as an instructor for Lone Star Community College.

• 7:08Stephen J. Dubner?

  Gotcha. And you live where, Daniel?

• 7:10Speaker 10

  Spring, Texas, basically, North Houston.

• 7:12Stephen J. Dubner?

  Okay. Let's get back to when he was teaching high school.

• 7:16Speaker 10

  And at the time, I had a belt that wore out, you know, had had it for several years. And I thought a second while I was looking for a new belt about the physics of what I was getting. And I was like, well, wait a minute. This basically works the same as a tourniquet. You know, you strap it on, pull it tight, and hope your pants don't fall down. But the physics of a belt, it pushes in and hopes that it creates enough friction to have your pants not fall down. Well, that didn't make sense. I mean, here I was talking to my students about how physics and what direction gravity was pulling and moving things. And here I was, wearing a belt. And I thought about it a little bit, and I was like, well, wait a minute. I need something to pull up if gravity is pulling down.

• 8:00Stephen J. Dubner?

  So if you're looking for something to pull pants north while gravity is pulling them south.

• 8:06Speaker 10

  Well, that's suspenders. And so I took a look around, started wearing them, and they were exceedingly comfortable. And so from there on out, I was like, well, I'm not going to get any more belts.

• 8:17Stephen J. Dubner?

  So your argument is that suspenders are essentially superior to belts in terms of the function that belts are supposed to serve, which is holding up pants, correct?

• 8:27Speaker 10

  Absolutely, and that they're superior as well in comfort.

• 8:31Stephen J. Dubner?

  Okay, so, let's say for a minute that I buy your argument, hook, line, and sinker, or belts and suspenders, as some people say. No offense to you at all, but why does it take until 2015 and a high school physics teacher near Houston, Texas, to ask this question that surely millions, if not billions of people have had opportunity to ask before, which is, why are we wearing these suboptimal things when there's something not only that doesn't have to be invented, but already exists that does the job better? Why were you the guy?

• 9:06Speaker 10

  Um, I would not subscribe something quite so grand to myself, but as far as why belts rule the apparel choice and the choice of holding up your pants, I'd honestly say that it's mostly social momentum.

• 9:24Stephen J. Dubner?

  Ah, social momentum. Is it true that the belt is superior to the suspender in the eyes of the people who create social momentum?

• 9:34Speaker 11

  I mean, suspenders have an image problem.

• 9:37Stephen J. Dubner?

  Valerie Steele is director and chief curator of the museum at FIT, the Fashion Institute of Technology, in New York.

• 9:46Speaker 11

  You think of them as being worn by people who are maybe too fat to be comfortable wearing a belt, so you have that image. You have some cool images, like punks, where suspenders, but even that is a very kind of aggressive kind of look. So belts, on the other hand, seem much more normative.

• 10:04Stephen J. Dubner?

  But how did belts become normative? Obviously, we need to take a step back.

• 10:11Speaker 12

  My name's Chloe Chapin, and I'm a fashion historian, and I teach theater design at Reed College.

• 10:16Stephen J. Dubner?

  So Chloe, not to be too forward, but what are you wearing right now?

• 10:23Speaker 12

  That's a great question. I'm wearing jeans, a v-neck t-shirt and a sweater and suede shoes that have purple soles.

• 10:32Stephen J. Dubner?

  Okay, so let's, let's talk briefly about the history of pants, please.

• 10:36Speaker 12

  Pants were theoretically invented by the Eurasian horse riders of the Eurasian steppes in the Bronze Age, so like maybe 3,000 B.C.

• 10:47Stephen J. Dubner?

  And they were wearing what before pants?

• 10:49Speaker 12

  Like a tunic or a wrap, you know, sort of like a, you could think of a kilt or a sari or a sarong, any just big kind of cloth that you would wrap around the body that would need to be held up. So belts existed before pants did.

• 11:03Stephen J. Dubner?

  I see. And belts were worn where then? Were they worn kind of more midriff?

• 11:08Speaker 12

  Yeah, I think you could think like Braveheart or one of those kind of things where you would use it just to kind of cinch the clothing around you and also as a way to hold up your sword belt.

• 11:21Stephen J. Dubner?

  Ah, okay. So they were functional in at least two or more ways at once.

• 11:25Speaker 12

  Exactly. They would hold your clothes on to you and also hold accessories on to you as well.

• 11:32Stephen J. Dubner?

  But then if you want to ride a horse all day, pants are helpful.

• 11:36Speaker 12

  Right. It just helps with the chafing.

• 11:38Stephen J. Dubner?

  Oh, with the chafing. Right.

• 11:40Speaker 12

  But they were not considered fashionable with like the, the, you know, fashionable societies, like the classical world, the Greeks and Romans, they never wore pants. They were considered barbaric. You could say that pants really entered into the fashion lexicon based on a Western European system in the early 1800s, like 1820s was when trousers first started to be worn. They had been wearing breeches, which were slightly different. They only fell to the knee. So these new trousers were cut very high-waisted, like above your belly button. And so you had to have suspenders to wear them because a belt wouldn't be functional.

• 12:23Stephen J. Dubner?

  And they were worn almost always with suspenders then?

• 12:26Speaker 12

  Correct.

• 12:27Stephen J. Dubner?

  So the belt came along well before the suspender, but there was a time when suspenders took the lead in the role of holding up pants. How then did the belt win? Well, pants themselves became more widespread, worn in more circumstances by coal miners, for instance, who carried heavy stuff in their pockets and needed those pants held up. Recreational sports were becoming more common.

• 12:52Speaker 12

  The problem with suspenders is that they're attached to your shoulders. So if you're doing any movements that where your hips and your shoulders are twisting or or moving kind of at different paces, like fighting or sports, a belt might be more practical for you. Because you know, when you if you can just imagine, like, you lift your shoulders up, you can think that if you're if you had on trousers, it might give you a little bit of a wedgie.

• 13:21Stephen J. Dubner?

  So the belt was-

• 13:22Speaker 12

  Whereas a belt wouldn't do that.

• 13:24Stephen J. Dubner?

  A wedgie preventer, right?

• 13:25Speaker 12

  Yes, exactly.

• 13:28Stephen J. Dubner?

  The fashion curve was also changing then, as always. Chapin points to the early 1920s, when pant waists were lowered. The end of World War I brought a burst of military-inspired fashion, including belts. Cowboys switched from suspenders to belts, in part because a belt could show off a buckle, which might signify a rodeo victory. Other victory belts would come along for wrestling, for boxing, and achievement belts in karate, for instance. The belt became a symbol of strength, of accomplishment. The suspender, meanwhile, would go on to become the symbol of what? Urkel?

• 14:13Speaker 13

  As good as I look now, see how studlier I've become.

• 14:17Stephen J. Dubner?

  The cater waiter? But if there's one person you're looking to blame for taking the belt mainstream, it would probably be-

• 14:25Speaker 12

  The Duke of Windsor. He was a very small man, so it's possible that some of the things that he helped to popularize were just things that looked good on him. If he was a very rotund gentleman, he might have made suspenders popular instead of belts.

• 14:42Stephen J. Dubner?

  The Duke of Windsor, known before his abdication in 1936 as King Edward VIII of the United Kingdom, embraced the belt. At the time, Chloe Chapin says, the belt was seen as a casual and very American thing.

• 14:58Speaker 12

  And so oftentimes, what these princes were known for was for wearing and making popular a fashion that an older generation would consider to be much too casual. Whether that was, you know, morning coats or belts, they were often sort of trendsetters. His friends that were sitting next to him. And then, you know, those people would have dinner with someone else. And they would be like, oh, after dinner, I'm unbuttoning my jacket, just like the prince does. You know how I hang out with the prince all the time? Because I'm so important, you know? And then one thing passes on to the next. It's like a celebrity haircut today. You want to associate with someone that you admire

• 15:41Speaker 12

  or look up to or think is fancy or important. And so you mimic their style.

• 15:47Stephen J. Dubner?

  And this is where we must acknowledge that if you are the kind of person who thinks about clothing as primarily practical as our listener, Daniel Sechchik, thinks about the belt and suspenders, well, maybe you aren't thinking about it right.

• 16:02Speaker 11

  Fashion is and always has been about much more than function.

• 16:06Stephen J. Dubner?

  Valerie Steele, again, from FIT.

• 16:08Speaker 11

  Back in the 19th century, scholars used to think that fashion developed out of functional needs. But in fact, all the research has shown that throughout world history, people have used clothing and adornment to signal messages to other people. So whether or not suspenders are more functional, quote unquote, than belts is kind of beside the point.

• 16:33Stephen J. Dubner?

  As Steele points out, this notion goes well beyond the belt.

• 16:36Speaker 11

  When you can choose clothes that you think are more functional, you could choose to wear sneakers rather than leather shoes or rather than high heels. But it's all going to be relative in what you tell yourself is functional for you. It's like people used to think pants were more functional than dresses. But really, it's all in your head what's going to be important to you. I remember living in Indonesia and a very famous old artist was invited to come to England and he refused to come because he said to me with horror, "They're going to make me wear trousers and shoes." And this is so uncomfortable and horrible, instead of wearing a sarong and flip flops or bare feet. So, the idea that clothes are primarily

• 17:21Speaker 11

  functional, it's primarily about what makes you feel comfortable and confident.

• 17:26Stephen J. Dubner?

  I think you'll admit, she makes a good point. That said, after the break, we look at some of the evidence that the modern belt is, well, stupid. We talk to a belt entrepreneur and we talk about a different kind of belt that takes a conversation in a very different direction.

• 17:46Speaker 01

  Yeah, I think it's a perfect storm of incentives leading to bad outcomes.

• 17:53Stephen J. Dubner?

  And, do us a favor, would you? If you don't already subscribe to Freakonomics Radio, go do it on iTunes or wherever you get your podcasts. And if you already do, go tell about 500 of your closest friends that they should subscribe to and that if they don't, you will spread vicious rumors about them. Tell everybody they wear suspenders.

• 18:29Stephen J. Dubner?

  Freakonomics Radio is sponsored by Granola. You know that moment when a meeting ends and someone says, "Let's circle back on this next week" and everyone nods but no one writes it down? Then next week rolls around and it's radio silence? That's why Granola exists. Granola is an AI-powered notepad built for the way real people actually meet. You take rough notes like you normally would and in the background, Granola securely transcribes the meeting. Then, it turns everything into clean, structured, actually useful notes when the meeting ends. And the best part? Granola works through your device's audio, which means it integrates seamlessly into the video conferencing tools you already use. No setup, no awkward bots. It's just your normal meeting with superpowers. If meetings are eating up your day, Granola is a no-brainer. You can try it totally free.

• 19:14Stephen J. Dubner?

  Just head to granola.ai/freakonomics. That's granola.ai/freakonomics to get your time back. Try it for free at granola.ai/freakonomics.

• 19:32Stephen J. Dubner?

  Freakonomics Radio is sponsored by Southern New Hampshire University. There's no hiding how convenient Southern New Hampshire University makes college. They offer over 80 career-focused graduate programs online. Classes have no set meeting times, so you can balance life and learning, and online tuition rates are some of the lowest in the country, making it all a little more manageable. A school this willing to work with you is worth the investment. Visit snhu.edu/freakonomics to learn more. Freakonomics Radio is sponsored by hotels.com. Hotels.com helps you find and book the right stay for work faster. With business preferences, save your travel must haves, like gym access or breakfast, just

• 20:16Stephen J. Dubner?

  once, then get tailored results whenever you search for work travel. Plus, with a free membership, you can save up to 20% on hotels and earn rewards on every stay for future travel. Book now at hotels.com. Visit hotels.com for details.

• 20:45Stephen J. Dubner?

  The belt is a fairly ubiquitous item, at least for those of us who wear pants. Men are more likely to wear belts than women, in part because men are more likely to wear pants, but also because the male body is shaped more like a tube without the nice rounded hip that prevents pants from slipping down. That's unless you're wearing very tight pants, or perhaps pants with a drawstring, or an elastic waistband, or pants that have been tailored to snugly fit your very own tubular male form. In all these cases, a belt isn't necessary, at least not as a functional item.

• 21:24Stephen J. Dubner?

  The fashionability of the belt is, as we've established, a separate and perhaps more salient issue. In any case, there are among us some men who are dissatisfied with the belt, who see it as a poor substitute for, say, the suspenders. Men like Daniel Sevchik from Spring, Texas.

• 21:47Stephen J. Dubner?

  So Daniel, let's make you king for a day. Would you take action against the belt or in favor of the suspender? Or are you the kind of guy who says, you know what? I figured out a better solution for myself. And if the rest of the world doesn't want to get on board, that's their problem.

• 22:03Speaker 10

  In the king for a day scenario, I would definitely, if I could, issue everyone eight pair of suspenders, probably either black or navy, because that should fit most outfits, and say, OK, for one week, I want you to try it. After a week, if you're still want your belts, OK, that's fine. That's your option. I'm not going to be an oppressive king. I want to try to be at least a little beneficent there. But I think that, given the opportunity and to see and interact with your peers in a set of suspenders, coupled with the comfort and the functionality of suspenders, I think that would probably swing it to where we'd see suspenders almost everywhere and belts would kind of go towards the wayside.

• 22:48Stephen J. Dubner?

  Valerie Steele of the Fashion Institute of Technology thinks that Sevchik is, how shall we say this, delusional.

• 22:56Speaker 11

  The thrift stores would be full of discarded pairs of suspenders. I mean, I think that you would find essentially no women wearing suspenders, except for a handful who wanted to get that kind of, you know, Berlin in the 1920s cross-dressing look. And you'd get a few fat guys and you'd get a few punky guys who would like suspenders, maybe a few hapless guys who thought that the Wall Street look circa 1985 was still stylish, would wear suspenders. But most people would keep on wearing whatever they were wearing before, belts or no belts.

• 23:29Stephen J. Dubner?

  Ouch. Maybe Valerie Steele is right. Maybe the belt is too firmly established as the winner of the holding up our pants contest, and the suspender is irretrievably unfashionable. But before we just accept that and move on, let's at least look at a few empirical differences between the two. Belts, by squeezing inward rather than tugging upward, can be uncomfortable and, if worn too tight, potentially harmful.

• 23:57Speaker 03

  Around the pelvis, there's a nerve that lives there called the lateral femoral cutaneous nerve.

• 24:05Stephen J. Dubner?

  That's Ken Hansraj, a spinal and orthopedic surgeon in Poughkeepsie, New York.

• 24:09Speaker 03

  Belts can compress it. And cause thigh pain. And that's called mora liza prosthetica. So if your belt is too tight and you do not have an adequate amount of girth or fat to protect you, then the belt will be on the nerve, irritating the nerve, causing thigh numbness and sometimes pain.

• 24:30Stephen J. Dubner?

  Hans Raj's most recent book is called Keys to an Amazing Life: Secrets of the Cervical Spine. A lot of patients who come to him with pain in their backs or necks have something in common. They wear a belt and use it for something beyond holding up their pants.

• 24:48Speaker 03

  When you have, take for example, firemen or medical doctors or plumbers, people that carry a lot of weight around their waist. They're not aware of the consequence of the weight. It's not just the weight. There is a force times distance. And I can tell you from doing other studies that the weight you're carrying around your waist probably weighs seven to nine times more to your spine because of the consequence of force times distance.

• 25:21Stephen J. Dubner?

  Suspenders, he says, can offer a lot more support for carrying that weight. That's why you often see loggers and construction workers wearing them. And a couple of police studies found that wearing suspenders along with a duty belt increased comfort and performance. All that said, I get it. I get that suspenders just are not a social norm, not yet at least, and that the belt, for now, reigns supreme.

• 25:58Stephen J. Dubner?

  Perhaps then, we should focus on at least improving the belt.

• 26:03Speaker 04

  I think the way the belt market is at the moment is broken.

• 26:06Stephen J. Dubner?

  That's Andrew Heffernan. He's a founder of a company called Beltology.

• 26:10Speaker 04

  And this is the idea of wearing a piece of leather around your waist with pre-punched holes that basically has no give. It's like wearing a tourniquet around your waist. It never fits properly and becomes very uncomfortable.

• 26:25Stephen J. Dubner?

  Heffernan did not start out in belts.

• 26:27Speaker 04

  I worked for years as a medical doctor in Ireland. And then I went and worked for Goldman Sachs as a banker. And then I did my MBA at Harvard. And after Harvard, I worked as a consultant in Bain and Company.

• 26:37Stephen J. Dubner?

  He saw an opportunity in what he calls the broken belt market.

• 26:41Speaker 04

  So menswear is the fastest growing part of the apparel industry right now. And accessories is the fastest growing part of menswear. And then when you dig into men's accessories, you see that pretty much every accessory is growing at double digits, except the belt.

• 26:58Stephen J. Dubner?

  Americans buy about 180 million belts a year.

• 27:02Speaker 04

  And again, it's been pretty close to that for the last few years. And this is in a context where, take socks, for example, where colorful socks has been growing at like 40% at specialty stores. Gloves is growing, scarves, hats, pocket squares, tie bars. Even ties was growing at one stage. And then you look at these numbers for the belt. And so the numbers were telling a story. So we believed that this was a sleeping giant of a market.

• 27:29Stephen J. Dubner?

  And that's why Heffernan founded, along with Anna Lundberg, the online shop Beltology.

• 27:34Speaker 04

  So number one, we think that there's a change in functionality in the way you wear your belt. And number two is the idea that subtly your belt can become an expressive accessory.

• 27:45Stephen J. Dubner?

  Number two kind of speaks for itself. As for number one, the functionality issue, Beltology sells a stretch woven belt, which is popular in Sweden, Lundberg's home country. The metal prong passes through the woven webbing rather than pre-punched holes, which means it looks like a traditional belt, not like a camping belt with a sliding buckle, but is theoretically at least, a little more comfortable and a lot more adjustable. Heffernan believes the Beltology formula is working.

• 28:16Speaker 04

  In our first year, we did sales roughly of half a million dollars. And in our second year, we're hoping to do sales of close to one and a half million dollars.

• 28:25Stephen J. Dubner?

  I wish Heffernan and Lundberg all the luck in the world with their business. And if they can make the belt a little better, that's nice too. But. I can't help thinking that the belt, for all its mainstream acceptance, for all its style potential, for whatever functionality it has, is still a pretty suboptimal solution to the primary problem it's trying to solve, which is holding up pants. And it reminds me, therefore, of another suboptimal solution to a problem that's a lot more important than pants.

• 28:58Speaker 01

  I started thinking about car seats when I was doing other research on auto fatalities related to drunk driving.

• 29:06Stephen J. Dubner?

  That, again, is Steve Levitt.

• 29:08Speaker 01

  And at the same time, was taking my kids in and out of car seats every day. And I always had the feeling that they flopped around a lot. And among other things, what car seats do is they prop you up really high in the air. And as I was looking at data on car crashes, I came to understand that there were really only two ways you could die in a car crash. One was that you were projected because you weren't restrained at all and you slammed into the glass or were thrown out of the car. And the other was if the space you were in collapsed around you and crushed you. And so in that principle, it seems like the lower the better when you're in a car. And so that was my intuition about car seats, is that they were floppy and they got you up in the air and that might put you at risk.

• 29:53Speaker 01

  So then we looked at the data.

• 29:55Stephen J. Dubner?

  The data were from the US government, which does a pretty good job collecting information on just about every traffic accident in the country, including the causes, the occupants of the vehicles, whether anyone's been drinking, and whether the passengers were restrained by seat belts or, in the case of children, car seats.

• 30:14Speaker 01

  And what we found in the data was really remarkable. It just, it seemed like the benefit of a car seat, a children's car seat, relative to a child wearing an adult seatbelt was minimal, almost zero. So in our research, in terms of fatalities, car seats didn't help at all. In terms of injuries, mostly relatively minor injuries, it seemed like car seats had a small advantage relative to adult seatbelts. But compared to the mythology that has arisen around car seats in which people seem to think, wow, these are the greatest invention ever. The facts and the mythology just didn't seem to line up very well at all.

• 30:56Stephen J. Dubner?

  So if you're really concerned about protecting kids in cars, the vast majority of whom ride in the backseat, what would be a better way to rig a car rather than add on car seats?

• 31:06Speaker 01

  So I don't even know the answer to that because there's been so little thought and research put into it because the car seat has been king.

• 31:16Stephen J. Dubner?

  Kind of like the belt has been king. To test out the car seat theory, Levitt and I contacted an independent lab that conducts crash tests. We commissioned two tests. A three-year-old-sized dummy in a car seat versus a three-year-old dummy in a lap-and-shoulder belt, and a six-year-old dummy in a booster seat versus a six-year-old dummy in lap-and-shoulder belt. Within minutes, we had some data.

• 31:45Speaker 01

  And the adult seat belt did great. It would have passed all of the federal requirements that they have for car seats. But I think you and I both came to believe that ironically, the people in this industry really weren't that interested in saving kids' lives. It seemed like they were more interested in selling products and avoiding lawsuits than actually reducing fatalities.

• 32:06Stephen J. Dubner?

  So you just answered my next question, which is why, if car seats aren't really that good at doing the one thing they're supposed to do, are they so omnipresent? I mean, really omnipresent because they're regulated. And I guess the answer is, I mean, how do you describe this kind of weird scenario? You've got automakers who aren't responsible, right? For protecting kids in backseats, really. You've got child car seat manufacturers who are responsible, even if their stuff doesn't work that well, and they profit from them. And then there's a government who demands it. Is that weird triangulation the reason why we've got this suboptimal solution?

• 32:39Speaker 01

  Yeah, I think it's a perfect storm of incentives leading to bad outcomes. So the only people fighting car seats in this entire country, Dubner, are you and me.

• 32:54Stephen J. Dubner?

  Our research on car seats has been controversial. Not everyone agrees that car seats underperform. But the underlying point is a broader one. For car seats and belts and probably a million other things we use every day without thinking about too much, we form habits. We accept conventional wisdoms that may not be very wise. We think that once someone has come up with some kind of solution, there's no reason to rethink it. Well, I think we should all do a little bit less of that. Our working headline for this episode was "Belts Are Stupid." Out of respect for belt lovers, we ended up toning it down, but I'm not willing to let go of the sentiment. And I'm curious to know what else you think is, on some level, stupid.

• 33:39Stephen J. Dubner?

  What's something you encounter or use or think about all the time that could really use a makeover? Send us your ideas in an email at [email protected] or give us a shout on Twitter, Facebook, or iTunes. We can also latch on to a free subscription to this podcast. And while we are talking about stupid things, we're working on another episode about the stupid things we all do in the kitchen. We'll be talking with a food science guy who says we're getting a lot wrong, and we'll answer questions like, when is the best time to salt your burger? How long should you let your eggs sit before they go on the stove? And is New York pizza really better because of the water? So we want to put your voice in this episode as well.

• 34:22Stephen J. Dubner?

  What are some of the culinary secrets you swear by? Who taught them to you? And, most important, do they really work? No recipes, please. Just go ahead and make a brief audio recording. You can use whatever voice memo app is on your phone. And email us the file at [email protected]. Please tell us your name, age, and where you're from. Thanks.

• 34:49Stephen J. Dubner?

  Freakonomics Radio is produced by WNYC and Dubner Productions. Today's episode was produced by Audrey Quinn. Our staff includes Irvan Gunja, Christopher Wirth, Jay Cowett, Greg Rosalsky, Merritt Jacob, Kasia Mohilewicz, Caroline English, and Alison Hockenberry. We had help this week from Matt Fidler. Starting this fall, you can hear Freakonomics Radio on public radio stations across the country. Make sure your station will be carrying it. And if you want even more Freakonomics, the books, the blog, side projects, et cetera, you can visit us at Freakonomics.com. You can also find us on Twitter and Facebook. And remember to subscribe to this podcast on iTunes or wherever you get your podcasts.

• 35:50Stephen J. Dubner?

  Freakonomics Radio is sponsored by Ozempic. Innovation happens through rethinking what's possible. And when it comes to GLP-1s, Ozempic pill does just that. Learn more about Ozempic semaglutide tablets, 4 and 9 milligrams, by calling 1-833-OZEMPIC or visit Ozempic.com to view the medication guide and ask your doctor what's possible with FDA-approved Ozempic pill.

• 36:21Stephen J. Dubner?

  Freakonomics Radio is sponsored by Southern Company. The world and its energy needs are always changing. Southern Company's commitment to meeting this demand stays the same. That's because Southern Company believes energy is more than a utility, it's what powers possibilities. So they are looking ahead and investing $80 billion in infrastructure upgrades and are committed to fueling growth in ways that benefit all customers so that reliable and affordable energy is accessible for generations to come. Go to SouthernCompany.com to learn more. Southern Company: building the future of energy.

• 37:00Speaker 14

  This podcast is supported by Nurtec ODT. Remedy Pant. We know you didn't ask for an interruption, but migraine doesn't wait for the right moment to interrupt either. It just barges in, takes your time, and throws everything off. So when migraine takes your time, take Nurtec. It's for the acute treatment of migraine with or without aura in adults. Nurtec can provide pain relief in two hours, which can last up to two days. Ask your healthcare provider if Nurtec is right for you, because your time is for you, not migraine. Don't take if allergic to Nurtec ODT. Allergic reactions can occur even days after use. Get help right away for trouble breathing, rash, swelling of face, mouth, tongue, or throat. High blood pressure and Raynaud's syndrome can occur. Get help for high blood pressure, numbness, coolness,

• 37:44Speaker 14

  pain, or color changes in fingers and toes. Common side effect is nausea. For full prescribing information, call 1-833-4-NURTEC, or visit Nurtec.com. All right, back to your podcast, playlist, or whatever's keeping you going today.

• 37:59Speaker 15

  This episode is brought to you by Charles Schwab. Is there a right time to sell a stock? Are you taking the right risks with your portfolio? Financial decisions can be tricky, and often, your own cognitive and emotional biases can lead you astray. Financial Decoder, an original podcast from Charles Schwab, can help. Join host Mark Reapy as he offers practical solutions to help overcome the cognitive and emotional biases that may affect your investing decisions. Listen at schwab.com/financialdecoder.