View Single Post
Old 04-07-09 | 08:20 PM
  #168  
Drwecki
Senior Member
 
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 372
Likes: 0
From: Madison, WI

Bikes: Tease Fixed Gear, Schwinn World Traveler 72, 60's Hawthorne

Originally Posted by pacificaslim
You are still not getting the point! The point is that research shows that crashes where one may sustain a head injury are very rare. And that the negative of those head injuries would be vastly outweighed by the positive health and safety benefits of more people riding bikes!

It boils down to something like this. Which would you prefer:


a) helmets are promoted/mandated, this makes cycling seem dangerous, few people ride bikes because their parents were afraid to let them do such a dangerous thing and so a whole generation grows up without becoming bike riders, instead people get fat and drive cars (which pollute and make the streets unsafe for bikes and pedestrians), but the few people who fall on their heads are protected slightly because they had a helmet on...

vs.


b) helmet use is ignored and cycling is promoted as the safe activity that it really is (when one looks at the true statistics), many people ride bicycles and stay more fit and this decreases the cost to society, while also making it safer to ride bikes because there are so many on the road that car drivers are more accommodating. The occasional person sustains a head injury that a helmet may have helped, but overall the costs to society are still lower because of the health benefits of having so many more cyclists on the road than in case "A".


Case "B" is what you have in countries with high cycling populations, and Case "A" is what you have in the USA. Cycling is NOT dangerous. It's like walking. Stop telling people it's dangerous and that they need helmets to do it, because this scares people away from cycling.


I'm sorry me not agreeing with you is not missing the point. I brought up a totally new one. Can you fathom that, someone has a different idea than you? I get what you're saying, it just sound very far from truth. For example...I can name at least 6 differences between the US and France or any other country that may lead to lower levels of biking.. 1 Spread of country, 2 Availability of parking, 3 availability of cars, 4 gas prices (much higher over there), 5 bike parking, 6 quality of the average bike (the american kid gets a huffy,,,what a bummer)... Anyways, any one of these can cause the observed difference that you are attributing to promoting helmet use...I've never seen a bike helmet ad argue you shouldn't bike. In fact the message is be safe and you can bike, not don't bike...You'd actually need to run an experiment (get a group of people who don't bike) show one group a video of bike safety helmet and another a video of seatbelt safety (or some other appropriate control..so the only difference is being exposed to helmet propoganda). Then give them a chance to bike or something like that. Your argument is definitely not as airtight as you think.
Drwecki is offline  
Reply