81–90 of 94 posts
Very well written - but a particularly poor content and irresponsible use of statistics.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> So by this logic someone not wearing a helmet while in a car is also an idiot. That may also be true, assuming that we have similar data showing that helmets help as much in cars as they do on bikes. Considering that car incidents are vastly different however, I suspect a helmet in a car incident doesn't have quite the same affect on head injuries. And even if they have proven to be useful, the studies are almost c…
We can see from racing sports that helmets are good to have in high speed car crashes. Rally drivers, Formula 1 drivers etc all wear them.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
In what way does the need to wear a helmet reduce your capability of cycling? Last time I checked helmets were sold in the same shops as bikes.
The fact that they require money, maintenance, and effort to use? It may be minimal but it is there.
A good example of this is air travel. Most of the risk in air travel is concentrated at the end points. The high risk parts of flight are getting on or off the ground, and flying through the high traffic area around the airport. When flying at cruising altitude between the endpoints, the risk is lowest.
Overall, a very long flight is more risky than a short flight, but if you went by risk per million hours travelled the long flight might actually appear to be less risky.
Since we're passing around flawed statistics, I'd like to share some anecdotes: 1. Just 2 months ago, my little sister was riding on a bike with no helmet. She was struck by a car. She flew off the bike, puncturing a lung, breaking a clavicle, several bones in her face, ribs, road rash, etc. She stopped breathing at the scene. After 1 week on the ventilator, she began breathing on her own. We knew there would likely…
>Her not wearing a helment not only derailed her life, but it caused major problems in the lives of everyone around her. Blame the victim? How about the driver, was it not his/her fault rather than your sisters?
Since we're passing around flawed statistics, I'd like to share some anecdotes: 1. Just 2 months ago, my little sister was riding on a bike with no helmet. She was struck by a car. She flew off the bike, puncturing a lung, breaking a clavicle, several bones in her face, ribs, road rash, etc. She stopped breathing at the scene. After 1 week on the ventilator, she began breathing on her own. We knew there would likely…
>Her not wearing a helment not only derailed her life, but it caused major problems in the lives of everyone around her. Blame the victim? How about the driver, was it not his/her fault rather than your sisters?
When it comes to collisions between vehicles and pedestrians or bikers, the vehicle has the right of weight.
This is the argument that bugs me the most. Isn't this the same as saying "If you're going hiking, taking a medical aid kit may create a false sense of security and induce risk-taking that hikers without a medic kit might not make.". No it's a dang medical kit, just take the damn thing!
I will always remind vividly is how hard the side of my head hit the pavement. No doubt it would have been really bad without the helmet. I ended up with badly scorched fingers, a big mark on the helmet where it hit the pavement, but no head injury. Please, use a helmet.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> So by this logic someone not wearing a helmet while in a car is also an idiot. That may also be true, assuming that we have similar data showing that helmets help as much in cars as they do on bikes. Considering that car incidents are vastly different however, I suspect a helmet in a car incident doesn't have quite the same affect on head injuries. And even if they have proven to be useful, the studies are almost c…
We can see from racing sports that helmets are good to have in high speed car crashes. Rally drivers, Formula 1 drivers etc all wear them.