Doctor Morbius said:
How are those reading and comprehension skills there, champ?
Actually astonishingly good. The real question is. What does the fact that the pros. Running on a controlled environment, as opposed to the uncontrolled streets, didn't follow a prudent course until last year have to do with the empirical evidence available for anyone willing to make half an effort to look for it or read it? In my first post I suggested you try pubmed as they have a plethora (big word, you'll need a dictionary) of research articles on bicycle helmets. Not one of them in any way even marginally inconclusive. I take it you haven't bothered to look?
I understand, it's your choice. People are entitled to be foolish. But, and this is the important part, one should never defend foolishness as anything other than what it is.
Here let me help you out. I stopped at 3 because That was how many were on the first page... of 25! Now if you have studies of comparable quality that refute this, bring them on. Otherwise,
Source: Orthop-Nurs. 2003 Jan-Feb; 22(1): 9-15
Abstract:
Bicycle injuries are the most common cause of serious head injury in children, and most of these injuries are preventable. The protective effect of bicycle helmets is well documented, but many child bicyclists do not wear them. This article summarizes the current state of research on bicycle injuries and helmet use and examines the effectiveness of legislation and injury-prevention strategies. Current studies indicate that children who wear helmets experience fewer head injuries and decreased severity of injury. Community-wide helmet-promotion campaigns combined with legislation are most successful in increasing helmet use and decreasing injury. Nurses can participate both at the institutional level and in community advocacy groups to promote bicycle safety for children.
Source: Inj-Prev. 2003 Jun; 9(2): 177-9
Abstract:
The purpose of this research was to explore the changes in children's bicycle helmet use and motor vehicle bicycle related injuries in Hillsborough County, Florida before and after passage of the Florida's bicycle helmet law for children under the age of 16. The results show a significant increase in bicycle helmet use among children, ages 5-13, in the post-law years compared with the pre-law years. Also, there has been a significant decline in the rates of bicycle related motor vehicle injuries among children in the post-law years compared with the pre-law years. Although there have been complementary educational and outreach activities in the county to support helmet use, it appears that the greatest increase in use occurred after the passage of the helmet law. It is recommended that educational efforts continue to sustain helmet use rates and decreases in injuries.
Source: Inj-Prev. 2003 Sep; 9(3): 266-7
Abstract:
In England the use of bicycle helmets remains low as debate continues about their effectiveness. Time trend studies have previously shown an inverse association between helmet wearing rates and hospital admissions for head injury, but data on helmet wearing are often sparse and admission rates vary for numerous reasons. For the period of this study comprehensive data on helmet wearing are available, and pedestrians are used as a control to monitor trends in admission. Among cyclists admitted to hospital, the percentage with head injury reduced from 27.9% (n = 3070) to 20.4% (n = 2154), as helmet wearing rose from 16.0% to 21.8%. Pedestrian head injury admissions also declined but by a significantly smaller amount. The wearing of a cycle helmet is estimated to prevent 60% of head injuries.