Originally Posted by
Maelochs
I do not think you are wrong, Avole ... I think the article you cited ans the study it cited are wrong. I think the headline is outrageous---Nothing about science can determine that bicycle helmets are "a must." that is just click-bait headline writing.
but ... if the hed was "a study shows that bicycle helmets could potentially prevent an undefined number of hypothetical fatalities" n one would click on it. So we get sensationalized pseudo-science based on junk science, and then people cite that trash as support for invasive and unnecessary legislation, or use it ti support arguments which didn't need to be started int he first place.
There is "right" and "wrong" in science---inaccurate data, incorrect data analysis, and claiming unsupported hypotheses to be proven. There is "right" and "wrong" in journalism ... again, inaccurate or misinterpreted data, false conclusions, invented theorems .... but in science and in journalism, standards have pretty much gone out the window.
There is no "wrong" or "right" about wearing a helmet.
However ... If I posted "person X does some unmentionable thing with a family member on a bicycle" and had nothing to back it up ... I am sure you could see why some of person X's family members might be upset, and even any decent person with a sense of honesty and propriety might be upset. "Let's not stoop to making unfounded accusations and imaginary claims here, alright?" Not many people would disagree I hope.
So, in this case, I say, Let's not stoop to making unfounded accusations and imaginary claims here, alright?
Wear your helmet if you choose, though. I have never in my life suggested that anyone not wear a helmet, or that there should be a law forbidding people whose chose to wear helmets, to wear them.
I’m happy there is a law that forces people to wear helmets., just as I am happy there is a law that enforces helmets for motorbikes, and seat belts for drivers ,As you are demonstrating. You have zero proof to indicate that any of your beliefs are more than just that. Can I suggest you head to Suvarnabhumi, and try the course there? Unless you climb down from your high horse, you’ll find all you can do is watch others having a ball.
Your wrong and right argument is entirely fallacious. Wearing a helmet is a basic safety measure, whether you like it or not, and to argue against it remarkably silly. As to science, have you ever wondered why helmets are an accepted norm in many sports, industries and so on. It helps PREVENT serious injury to that vital human organ, the brain. Personally, if I go through my cycling life wearing a helmet without ever bring in a situation where it was required I’ll be delighted. As you surely you should be aware, a device that helps prevent injury does not is just that. I do not expect to get thrown around an aircraft by turbulence on a flight, but I am not stupid enough to ignore the advice re seatbelts.
I don’t wish to be hard, but do not understand where you are coming from. As mentioned, your ‘right and wrong’ argument is simply incorrect. If you were a scientist or a journalist, you would understand that, and why. As to your ‘unmentionable ‘ things argument, it is not an analogy, more an attempt to trivialise in a particularly nasty way.