Frank Krygowski wrote:

Be aware that there is _very_ serious discussion taking place in many
scholarly publications regarding the effectiveness of helmets.

What makes it so serious, compared to other discussions? Letters after people's
names? Big egos? Feeding frenzy at the hog trough of research dollars?
Self-importance typically associated with these things? Or is it earnest
effort, for once!

In
general, we seem to have the public (under the influence of heavy
promotion) believing that helmets are a godsend. Meanwhile, competent
statisticians who examine the actual data are much, much more
skeptical of both the supposed benefit, and the supposed need.

Ah, but there's no money to be made in telling people they don't need helmets!
And no political points gained from being "anti-safety."

Matt O.