Originally Posted by
I-Like-To-Bike
Given the current emotional climate and family/medical pressure to get any head impact "checked out" immediately at a hospital "just in case," I doubt that you would have avoided the ambulance ride to the hospital and subsequent 24 hour observation if your helmet was so much as scratched after an impact with a truck. I am surprised that the hospital didn't run all sorts of expensive tests i.e. MRI's just in case, especially if the procedure would be covered by somebody's insurance.
well, it's not exactly emotional given the death of Natasha Richardson. But they've been doing that for years anyway. In my case, I rode away from the incident with a broken helmet and a sore shoulder, but i wasn't going to ride an ambulance for that. You would have picked up the bill since I was active duty military. My previous head injury - without a helmet - ended up in me losing a large amount of blood and getting almost 30 stitches. And then they kept me overnight and woke me up every two hours to make sure I wasn't dead. MRI's weren't real common back then, and the university didn't have one.
Originally Posted by
TommyBing
OP said brother DID wear helmet. OP wanted brother to not have helmet, then the traumatic events that his family suffered would not have happened.
although the post was a little obtuse, it was clear to me that he wanted the injuries to be more severe so that the brother would have died instead of remaining in a persistent vegetative state. I can understand that, but given that bicycle helmets don't necessarily protect that well for that type of incident it's not clear that the helmet changed the outcome.