Originally Posted by phinney
The chances of getting seriously injured are so low that wearing a helmet is just not justifiable.
For you maybe, like I said, I've had 2 incidents of head/pavement contact that w/o a helmet, would've left me in the hospital for a while. Does that make me extremely lucky to beat these 1 in a million odds of yours?
I will bring out an example in engineering, we usually design for safety and over design. I agree with you, the odds of failure are low, however, the consequences are much greater. When we know that there is a chance of being wrong in engineering, there's two types, A and B, we usually try to aim for being wrong one way rather than the other.
The assumption is helmets help in the event of an accident. There is a 1/1000 chance of me being wrong. How would I like to be wrong?
Type A is: i am wrong, helmets don't help at all, but i wear a helmet. i lost 50 bucks.
Type B is: i am wrong, helmets dont help at all, and i don't wear a helmet. i gain 50 bucks.
Now, the assumption is that helmets aren't justified cause the odds are so low. This is how you can be wrong.
Type A is: you are wrong, helmets help, and you wear a helmet. you lost 50 bucks but you have avoided more serious injury.
Type B is: you are wrong, helmets help, but you don't wear a helmet. you gain 50 bucks but you have not avoided more serious injury.
How would you like to be wrong?
It's fine if you don't wear a helmet but to convince others not to, that's just irresponsible. At least if I'm wrong, the consequencs are small, if you're wrong, someone could sustain serious injury.