There are always going to be some people who will never give up their quest to impose what they think is best on others.
This has been posted on the HCS (part 3) thread and this was my response:
Manitoba examined the issue in 2005 when the govt set up a task force that included representatives of all parties. The task force concluded the cons of a helmet law outweighed the pros so recommended there be no law for children.
to say, "It's atrocious that in 2010, every province does not have some sort of helmet legislation" is to be completely ignorant of the reasons the majority of provinces have rejected helmet laws.
to say, "Clearly, helmet legislation works and clearly it reduces serious head injuries and facial lacerations" is to reveal yourself as being more than simply ignorant. It shows you don't have a clear grasp on the issue.
They may have been better off to consider the injury and fatality rates between provinces with and without helmet laws. Provinces with helmet laws and larger percentages of people wearing helmets have no better record than non-helmet law provinces. In fact, non-helmet law provinces have lower rates of injury and fatality than helmet law provinces (a 6 year period on either side of the passing of a law revealed a reduction of 20.4% reduction, vs. a reduction of 29.5% in non-helmet law provinces. An examination of hospital admissions reveals that admissions fell by 10 per cent over a 12-month period for provinces with helmet laws, while provinces without helmet laws saw a reduction of 22 per cent.)
The figure of a 73% wearing rate in NS is a little suspect as well. Stats Can recently published a study that place BC as the highest usage rate in the country at 60%.
To say, "provincial helmet legislation does not cause people to cycle less" is to dismiss an article in the Canadian Medical Association Journal uncovering a 62% drop in cycling the year immediately following the enforcement of the Province of Nova Scotia's helmet law. It also dismisses BCs 28% drop in cycling following its law being passed and enforced.
All in all, pretty shoddy work done by an undergrad that ignores much work done on the issue by experts in the field. The information the conclusions are based on are from a simple survey involving people who are not experts.
Not very credible, but newsworthy.
Last edited by closetbiker; 08-12-10 at 08:29 AM.