S
Steven M. Scharf
Guest
"psycholist" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> You're free to believe whatever foolish thing you want to believe. I'm
not arguing for mandatory helmet laws. I just know that I'm very glad I had
my helmet on when I was hit. And it's my opinion that any serious cyclist
who logs serious mileage is playing a foolish game of roulette if they
believe they'll never get hit. And let me ask you something. If you knew
you were going to get hit, would you rather be wearing a helmet or not?
The more valuable statistics are those that look at bicycle accidents that
involved head injury, and then break them down into the percentage of
victims that were wearing helmets versus the percentage of victims that were
not wearing helmets. The studies that attempt measure total number of head
injuries before and after the implementation of mandatory helmet laws are
hopelessly flawed, since there are so many other variables that come into
play.
In the major U.S. study of severity of head injuries in crashes where head
injuries were sustained:
Helmeted
----------
92% minor
0% none
8% severe
Non Helmeted
---------------
65%
7%
28%
So the bottom line is that if you are involved in a crash where there are
head injuries, you are four times as likely to have a severe injury if you
aren't wearing a helmet.
I am certainly not in favor of mandatory helmet laws, each person is a free
agent and can do what they want, as long as they are prepared for the
consequences. But a lot of cyclists seem to be deluding themselves with
regard to helmets, by bringing up all sorts of side issues, such as the fact
(which no one argues with), that there are other measures that can be taken
to reduce accidents and injuries by larger amounts that helmets reduce them
(neglecting to state the reductions are not exclusive, they are additive).
Why don't they just say that they don't like wearing helmets, and that they
are perfectly willing to accept the extra risk? They seem to be determined
to somehow prove that their decision to not wear a helmet does not expose
them to any greater risk at all, which of course is nonsense.
The real world figures show that there is a significant benefit from helmet
use in the reduction of head injuries when crashes occur. To a logical
person, this would dictate the use of a helmet.
But since there are so few crashes with head injuries to begin with,
statistically there is not data that shows that cycling while wearing a
helmet is any safer overall. Unfortunately, this statistic won't protect you
if you are one of the unfortunate few that is involved in an accident
involving head injuries, and you can be involved in one of these through no
fault of your own.
At this point someone will pipe in that maybe we should require helmet use
in cars, that helmet laws will reduce the number of cyclists, that better
law enforcement against errant drives is needed, that some cyclists don't
wear the helmet properly, etc., etc. Great side-issues, but ultimately
irrelevant.
Steve
http://bicyclelighting.com
"Believe what you're told. There'd be chaos if everyone thought for oneself"
World Famous Top Dog Hot Dog Stand, Berkeley, Oakland, San Jose
news:[email protected]...
> You're free to believe whatever foolish thing you want to believe. I'm
not arguing for mandatory helmet laws. I just know that I'm very glad I had
my helmet on when I was hit. And it's my opinion that any serious cyclist
who logs serious mileage is playing a foolish game of roulette if they
believe they'll never get hit. And let me ask you something. If you knew
you were going to get hit, would you rather be wearing a helmet or not?
The more valuable statistics are those that look at bicycle accidents that
involved head injury, and then break them down into the percentage of
victims that were wearing helmets versus the percentage of victims that were
not wearing helmets. The studies that attempt measure total number of head
injuries before and after the implementation of mandatory helmet laws are
hopelessly flawed, since there are so many other variables that come into
play.
In the major U.S. study of severity of head injuries in crashes where head
injuries were sustained:
Helmeted
----------
92% minor
0% none
8% severe
Non Helmeted
---------------
65%
7%
28%
So the bottom line is that if you are involved in a crash where there are
head injuries, you are four times as likely to have a severe injury if you
aren't wearing a helmet.
I am certainly not in favor of mandatory helmet laws, each person is a free
agent and can do what they want, as long as they are prepared for the
consequences. But a lot of cyclists seem to be deluding themselves with
regard to helmets, by bringing up all sorts of side issues, such as the fact
(which no one argues with), that there are other measures that can be taken
to reduce accidents and injuries by larger amounts that helmets reduce them
(neglecting to state the reductions are not exclusive, they are additive).
Why don't they just say that they don't like wearing helmets, and that they
are perfectly willing to accept the extra risk? They seem to be determined
to somehow prove that their decision to not wear a helmet does not expose
them to any greater risk at all, which of course is nonsense.
The real world figures show that there is a significant benefit from helmet
use in the reduction of head injuries when crashes occur. To a logical
person, this would dictate the use of a helmet.
But since there are so few crashes with head injuries to begin with,
statistically there is not data that shows that cycling while wearing a
helmet is any safer overall. Unfortunately, this statistic won't protect you
if you are one of the unfortunate few that is involved in an accident
involving head injuries, and you can be involved in one of these through no
fault of your own.
At this point someone will pipe in that maybe we should require helmet use
in cars, that helmet laws will reduce the number of cyclists, that better
law enforcement against errant drives is needed, that some cyclists don't
wear the helmet properly, etc., etc. Great side-issues, but ultimately
irrelevant.
Steve
http://bicyclelighting.com
"Believe what you're told. There'd be chaos if everyone thought for oneself"
World Famous Top Dog Hot Dog Stand, Berkeley, Oakland, San Jose