Bicycle helmet law can save lives

Isn't this one of the 10 commandments? So why do we need another law?

(remove the polite word to reply) wrote in message . com...
Is this a case of "When you don't have facts, cry "troll"? An ad hominem attack?

This is an important subject, if you don't want to discuss it, you don't have to.

This "important subject" has been discussed many times, already.
Nothing gets solved, the pro helmet people state their position, the
anti helmet group then counters, and very little is ever agreed on.
Then there is the third position, which is mine, that it be a matter
of choice for adults. I am pro-choice on many issues. I strongly
disagree with mandatory helmet laws. I wear a helmet, it's my choice.
If you don't want to wear one, that's ok with me.
Do a search on helmets and you will find hundreds of posts on the
topic. Trust me, there is nothing left to discuss. Everything I have
said, above, has been said before.

Life is Good!
Jeff

Garrison Hilliard writes:

Saturday, May 1, 2004 Bicycle helmet law can save lives

Ah, the quarterly helmet thread. Goody. Did you write this nonsense?


Editorial


Today, Cincinnati joins several area cities, along with 20 states
and more than 125 communities nationwide, in taking a small but
important step to protect children's safety.

snip

Unfortunately, such laws become necessary when adults neglect to
take this simple, obvious step that saves kids' lives. Often, helmet
laws work as a reminder, boosting voluntary helmet use without
putting undue burdens on families. When New Jersey passed a state
law in 1992, usage among kids quickly jumped from 10 percent to 69
percent. That translates directly into lives saved.

Prove it.

Nationally, about 250 kids a year die in bicycle mishaps, and
thousands receive serious head injuries that often lead to permanent
disabilities. Locally, about 90 percent of kids brought to
Children's Hospital after bike mishaps have head injuries. Jennifer
Ringel, a pediatrician instrumental in the passage of Blue Ash's
ordinance last fall, argued that helmet use could prevent 75 percent
of bike fatalities and 86 percent of head injuries.

Again, prove it.

Requiring helmet use is a common-sense measure that can prevent
needless costs to society and heartache to families. More
communities should follow suit.

Because the gov'mint always knows better?

The simple fact is that it is the helmet industry that claims helmets
save lives. This ignores the evidence, however, which does not show a
reliable correlation between helmet use and lives saved. For one
thing, many people who die in bike accidents die from laceration and
blunt trauma wounds to abdominal organs. Helmets don't help with
these. The assumption made in the sort of specious estimates given by
distraught ER doctors and pediatricians are that all cycling-related
deaths are specifically caused by brain injury, when in fact that is
not the case. Indeed, the types of impacts that a helmet can absorb
probably wouldn't have been fatal although they would have hurt.

This opinion is from a liberal who usually wears a helmet, BTW, on the
grounds that it is not inconvenient, not an affront to my masculinity,
won't do me any harm and might possibly help even though I think
that's unlikely. Plus it keeps peace with my wife, and I'd rather
pick a more important battle. ;-) I have found my helmet helpful
twice- once when I crashed in a road race and it kept me from getting
road rash on my head, and once when I was knocked off my bike and
assaulted.

wrote:

Garrison Hilliard writes:


Bicycle helmet law can save lives.


Troll! Ged-outta-heah! Was you born yestiddy?

Garrison was quoting a newspaper editorial about a mandatory helmet law.
That's not a troll, in my book, any more than someone quoting a
Bicycling magazine article on chain stretch or on frames going soft - to
pick a couple topics Jobst would jump on.

The idea that we should not discuss mandatory helmets in this group is
foolish. It's more pertinent than global warming, the conquest of Iraq,
gun control, and many other recurring themes.

And while many have heard it all before, these groups are regularly
visited by newbies who are learning from the beginning. Unlike the
above topics, this is one of the few places a person can get both sides
of the story.

Ignoring mandatory helmet laws is putting your styrofoam-covered head in
the sand. If nobody presents the actual data, legislators and even
cyclists will continue to believe the "85% reduction in head injuries"
lie, and our rights to ride will continue to be restricted.

--
-------------
Frank Krygowski [To reply, remove rodent and vegetable dot com,
replace with cc.ysu dot edu]

Frank Krygowski wrote:

The idea that we should not discuss mandatory helmets in this group is
foolish.

Perhaps rec.bicycles.misc would be more appropriate. No reason to cross-post it
to *.tech

It's more pertinent than global warming, the conquest of
Iraq, gun control, and many other recurring themes.

That's for sure!

Matt O.

Zog The Undeniable wrote:
H**met laws are nearly always pushed by people who don't ride bikes. The
two main promoters of a law in the UK are both fat, unhealthy-looking
and haven't been on a bike for years.

So that's where David Coulthard's been going wrong this F1 season?

--
R.

Richard Brockie "Categorical statements
The tall blond one. always cause trouble."

Tim McNamara writes:
I have found my helmet helpful
twice- once when I crashed in a road race and it kept me from getting
road rash on my head, and once when I was knocked off my bike and
assaulted.

Yow! My helmet has helped me exactly once -- when a drunk college kid
randomly decided to throw a bottle at my head as I rode by him one
evening. It just bounced off my helmet and did no harm at all...

Chris
--
Chris Colohan Email: PGP: finger
Web: www.colohan.com Phone: (412)268-4751

Zog The Undeniable spake thusly on or about Sun, 2
May 2004 07:09:41 UTC

- As we British would say, "********!" A similar law was proposed in the
- UK, but failed last week. The problem is that bike use declines
- massively as soon as a law is brought in. It takes years to recover, if
- it ever does.
-

get them off the damned bikes and they will not be killed or hurt their
heads. proof that helmet laws save lives and reduce head injuries.

I wear one but do not require anyone but my child to wear one. my reasons
are my own injured head and broken helmetsover my nearly 40 years of
riding. other folks my land differently.

you could always wear the thing on your elbow...



--
I hurt before the ride so fibro gives me a head
start on the rest of the pack. silver lining?

In article ,
says...
Is this a case of "When you don't have facts, cry "troll"? An ad hominem attack?

This is an important subject, if you don't want to discuss it, you don't have to.

It has been discussed completely to death over the last year.

--
Dave Kerber
Fight spam: remove the ns_ from the return address before replying!

REAL programmers write self-modifying code.

Richard Brockie wrote:


So that's where David Coulthard's been going wrong this F1 season?

Heh. I was talking about these two, but I see your point ;-)

http://www.bikebiz.co.uk/daily-news/article.php?id=3942