"Steven M. Scharf" wrote:

Chris B. wrote:

I don't like holier than thou people that try to tell other people what to
do; I encourage people to look at the facts and make their own informed
decisions. But people that intentionally misinform others, while deluding
themselves, are not my favorite people.


Contrasting the last paragraph in your post with nearly everything
else I have seen you write, I must conclude that you are doing parody
here.

No parody. On my lighting pages I provide referenced facts, and informed
opinions. The negative comments I've seen posted all use the same flawed
logic I see in the helmet debate: "this is what I do, I've been doing it
for a long time, I haven't had a problem with it, so this proves that
I'm right and everyone should do everything the same way I do it." This
line of reasoning is not logical. These people will refuse to believe
anything that contradicts their beliefs, regardless of the evidence.

I can see both sides of the helmet issue. The pro-helmet people vastly
over-exaggerate the statistical benefit of helmets, while the
anti-helmet people will simply ignore the evidence regarding injuries in
helmet versus non-helmet head injury studies.

I guess it would depend on the definition of dangerous, wouldn't it?
How many people are killed on stairs, in the bathtub/shower, walking
on the street. Wearing a motorcyle helmet is as dangerous as not
wearing one; if you have an impact accident, you -may- reduce
the injuries, if you happen to whiplash your head during the accident,
the extra weight of the helmet -can- snap your neck and kill you.

A bicycle helmet is much lighter than a motorcycle helmet, I grant you,
but I still think the choice should rest with the individual, not the
government.

--

-TTFN

-Steven