Originally Posted by
mconlonx
I didn't mention cost effectiveness, I'm talking about effective cycling safety measures.
It's "cost effectiveness" (cost/benefit ratio) that is the argument. If something is "effective" but too expensive, then it really doesn't matter that it's "effective".
Originally Posted by
mconlonx
If a new cyclist took $70 they were going to spend on a helmet
Helmets don't have to cost "$70". No one knows whether they would have fewer injuries (there's
no data to support that conclusion). And, again, you don't have to do just one thing.
Originally Posted by
mconlonx
and spent it on a safety course instead, they'd be a safer rider than if they just plunked a styrofoam hat on top of their head. Generally speaking.
You really don't know whether there would be fewer injuries. And helmets are not necessarily without value for "safe" riders either. And, again, you can do both. And, you can read Allen's "Street Smarts" for nothing and get most of what you'd get from a LAB class (I paid $35) for free.
Originally Posted by
mconlonx
You keep dwelling on cost effectiveness. I'm not talking about that at all.
You
should be. And you
are talking about it (your "$70" helmet).