Originally Posted by
closetbiker
Yeah, I do have an argument, it's just that you can't see it or you don't want to face it.
In more plain terms, the argument is, cyclists receive no more head injury than the general public. Sure, they do receive their fair share of head injuries as does everyone else, so why would a priority be place on having people on bikes wear helmets when they can suffer the same injury when they are off the bike? If head injury is a concern, why aren't people wearing helmets 24/7?
If you stand against this argument, fair enough, but it would help this position to provide some type of reasonable evidence that cyclists receive head injuries at a greater rate than the general population. It's not enough to say something has happened, you have to show the likelyhood of something happening.
Where is the published, peer-reviewed research showing that cyclists do NOT have a higher injury rate than equivalently-aged, equivalently-conditioned people?
And how are rates of accidents and injuries for non-cyclists relevant to the rates for cyclists, anyway? It's a different activity.
And STILL none of that goes to answering the question of whether or not bike helmets help prevent head injuries to cyclists. You SIMPLY REFUSE to address that.