Why are there no safety rules regarding children on bikes?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The vast majority of bicycling injuries and deaths under the age of 20 could be prevented by wearing a helmet. Yet I routinely see children on bikes or, even worse, ebikes with no helmets.

"An average of 247 traumatic brain injury deaths and 140,000 head injuries among children and adolescents younger than 20 years were related to bicycle crashes each year in the United States. As many as 184 deaths and 116,000 head injuries might have been prevented annually if these riders had worn helmets. An additional 19,000 mouth and chin injuries were treated each year."

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/8909479/

I wear a helmet and my kids wear helmets (so far). I also wonder how many of those injuries would be prevented if someone didn't drive into them.

100 percent of them would be avoided if parents didn't put their kids in harm's way.

Do you also not let your kids swim or bathe? Think of the drowning risk!

I'm confused.

I thought you said the roads of D.C. are incredibly dangerous because everyone is going 70 mph and no one obeys any traffic rules and drivers are complete sociopaths with no regard for human life and police don't enforce anything and it's all just a complete free for all.

Now, you're telling me that allowing children to venture into all of that is no more dangerous than taking a bath?

The answer is that when bicyclists want the city to radically increase congestion and spend a bajillion dollars on bike lanes, then the streets are extremely dangerous.

But when bicyclists want to take their three year old on their bike for whatever reason, then the streets are not dangerous at all.

Or, possibly, not all bicyclists think exactly alike, and different people are making different arguments in response to different situations. Personally, I always wear a helmet when I ride, as do my kids, and I'd also like the streets to be safer for them and for me. I don't find the arguments against helmet laws persuasive, though I understand that there are some, and I'm fine with increased enforcement there. But I also think you'd improve overall safety more with increased enforcement of car traffic laws.

Yeah, I wear a helmet 99.9% of the time - i.e., whenever I reasonably can. But passing a law that says I am legally required means that when I judge it's ok not to I'm dissuaded from doing so. What if it's a short/safe ride on a CaBi and I don't have a helmet available?

I can't believe bikers aren't required to wear helmets

Motorcyclists are required to wear helmets. The speed limit in the city is 25 MPH. E-bikes can go 25 MPH with the electric motor alone. The current status of law is nonsensical.

The vast majority of bicycling injuries and deaths under the age of 20 could be prevented by wearing a helmet. Yet I routinely see children on bikes or, even worse, ebikes with no helmets.

"An average of 247 traumatic brain injury deaths and 140,000 head injuries among children and adolescents younger than 20 years were related to bicycle crashes each year in the United States. As many as 184 deaths and 116,000 head injuries might have been prevented annually if these riders had worn helmets. An additional 19,000 mouth and chin injuries were treated each year."

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/8909479/

where do you routinely see this? DC? I almost never see bikers without helmets, of any age.

I’ve never seen a single CaBi user wearing a helmet.

CaBinis also pretty low risk. Those are slow upright bikes. It's not like they're racing with clipped in pedals.

And…? This is an irrelevant point to whether or not someone never sees someone wearing a helmet.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The vast majority of bicycling injuries and deaths under the age of 20 could be prevented by wearing a helmet. Yet I routinely see children on bikes or, even worse, ebikes with no helmets.

"An average of 247 traumatic brain injury deaths and 140,000 head injuries among children and adolescents younger than 20 years were related to bicycle crashes each year in the United States. As many as 184 deaths and 116,000 head injuries might have been prevented annually if these riders had worn helmets. An additional 19,000 mouth and chin injuries were treated each year."

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/8909479/

I wear a helmet and my kids wear helmets (so far). I also wonder how many of those injuries would be prevented if someone didn't drive into them.

100 percent of them would be avoided if parents didn't put their kids in harm's way.

Do you also not let your kids swim or bathe? Think of the drowning risk!

I'm confused.

I thought you said the roads of D.C. are incredibly dangerous because everyone is going 70 mph and no one obeys any traffic rules and drivers are complete sociopaths with no regard for human life and police don't enforce anything and it's all just a complete free for all.

Now, you're telling me that allowing children to venture into all of that is no more dangerous than taking a bath?

The answer is that when bicyclists want the city to radically increase congestion and spend a bajillion dollars on bike lanes, then the streets are extremely dangerous.

But when bicyclists want to take their three year old on their bike for whatever reason, then the streets are not dangerous at all.

Or, possibly, not all bicyclists think exactly alike, and different people are making different arguments in response to different situations. Personally, I always wear a helmet when I ride, as do my kids, and I'd also like the streets to be safer for them and for me. I don't find the arguments against helmet laws persuasive, though I understand that there are some, and I'm fine with increased enforcement there. But I also think you'd improve overall safety more with increased enforcement of car traffic laws.

Yeah, I wear a helmet 99.9% of the time - i.e., whenever I reasonably can. But passing a law that says I am legally required means that when I judge it's ok not to I'm dissuaded from doing so. What if it's a short/safe ride on a CaBi and I don't have a helmet available?

I can't believe bikers aren't required to wear helmets

Motorcyclists are required to wear helmets. The speed limit in the city is 25 MPH. E-bikes can go 25 MPH with the electric motor alone. The current status of law is nonsensical.

The vast majority of bicycling injuries and deaths under the age of 20 could be prevented by wearing a helmet. Yet I routinely see children on bikes or, even worse, ebikes with no helmets.

"An average of 247 traumatic brain injury deaths and 140,000 head injuries among children and adolescents younger than 20 years were related to bicycle crashes each year in the United States. As many as 184 deaths and 116,000 head injuries might have been prevented annually if these riders had worn helmets. An additional 19,000 mouth and chin injuries were treated each year."

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/8909479/

where do you routinely see this? DC? I almost never see bikers without helmets, of any age.

I’ve never seen a single CaBi user wearing a helmet.

CaBinis also pretty low risk. Those are slow upright bikes. It's not like they're racing with clipped in pedals.

And…? This is an irrelevant point to whether or not someone never sees someone wearing a helmet.

It's relevant if you care about the risk of head injury. Do you ask if pedestrians wear helmets?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The vast majority of bicycling injuries and deaths under the age of 20 could be prevented by wearing a helmet. Yet I routinely see children on bikes or, even worse, ebikes with no helmets.

"An average of 247 traumatic brain injury deaths and 140,000 head injuries among children and adolescents younger than 20 years were related to bicycle crashes each year in the United States. As many as 184 deaths and 116,000 head injuries might have been prevented annually if these riders had worn helmets. An additional 19,000 mouth and chin injuries were treated each year."

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/8909479/

I wear a helmet and my kids wear helmets (so far). I also wonder how many of those injuries would be prevented if someone didn't drive into them.

100 percent of them would be avoided if parents didn't put their kids in harm's way.

Do you also not let your kids swim or bathe? Think of the drowning risk!

I'm confused.

I thought you said the roads of D.C. are incredibly dangerous because everyone is going 70 mph and no one obeys any traffic rules and drivers are complete sociopaths with no regard for human life and police don't enforce anything and it's all just a complete free for all.

Now, you're telling me that allowing children to venture into all of that is no more dangerous than taking a bath?

The answer is that when bicyclists want the city to radically increase congestion and spend a bajillion dollars on bike lanes, then the streets are extremely dangerous.

But when bicyclists want to take their three year old on their bike for whatever reason, then the streets are not dangerous at all.

Or, possibly, not all bicyclists think exactly alike, and different people are making different arguments in response to different situations. Personally, I always wear a helmet when I ride, as do my kids, and I'd also like the streets to be safer for them and for me. I don't find the arguments against helmet laws persuasive, though I understand that there are some, and I'm fine with increased enforcement there. But I also think you'd improve overall safety more with increased enforcement of car traffic laws.

Yeah, I wear a helmet 99.9% of the time - i.e., whenever I reasonably can. But passing a law that says I am legally required means that when I judge it's ok not to I'm dissuaded from doing so. What if it's a short/safe ride on a CaBi and I don't have a helmet available?

I can't believe bikers aren't required to wear helmets

Motorcyclists are required to wear helmets. The speed limit in the city is 25 MPH. E-bikes can go 25 MPH with the electric motor alone. The current status of law is nonsensical.

The vast majority of bicycling injuries and deaths under the age of 20 could be prevented by wearing a helmet. Yet I routinely see children on bikes or, even worse, ebikes with no helmets.

"An average of 247 traumatic brain injury deaths and 140,000 head injuries among children and adolescents younger than 20 years were related to bicycle crashes each year in the United States. As many as 184 deaths and 116,000 head injuries might have been prevented annually if these riders had worn helmets. An additional 19,000 mouth and chin injuries were treated each year."

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/8909479/

where do you routinely see this? DC? I almost never see bikers without helmets, of any age.

I’ve never seen a single CaBi user wearing a helmet.

CaBinis also pretty low risk. Those are slow upright bikes. It's not like they're racing with clipped in pedals.

And…? This is an irrelevant point to whether or not someone never sees someone wearing a helmet.

It's relevant if you care about the risk of head injury. Do you ask if pedestrians wear helmets?

In the Netherlands, a study found that at speeds below 15 MPH in normal traffic conditions, helmets significantly reduced the risk of traumatic brain injury. Do you have any other b.s. that you would like to peddle?
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8240888/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The vast majority of bicycling injuries and deaths under the age of 20 could be prevented by wearing a helmet. Yet I routinely see children on bikes or, even worse, ebikes with no helmets.

"An average of 247 traumatic brain injury deaths and 140,000 head injuries among children and adolescents younger than 20 years were related to bicycle crashes each year in the United States. As many as 184 deaths and 116,000 head injuries might have been prevented annually if these riders had worn helmets. An additional 19,000 mouth and chin injuries were treated each year."

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/8909479/

I wear a helmet and my kids wear helmets (so far). I also wonder how many of those injuries would be prevented if someone didn't drive into them.

100 percent of them would be avoided if parents didn't put their kids in harm's way.

Do you also not let your kids swim or bathe? Think of the drowning risk!

I'm confused.

I thought you said the roads of D.C. are incredibly dangerous because everyone is going 70 mph and no one obeys any traffic rules and drivers are complete sociopaths with no regard for human life and police don't enforce anything and it's all just a complete free for all.

Now, you're telling me that allowing children to venture into all of that is no more dangerous than taking a bath?

The answer is that when bicyclists want the city to radically increase congestion and spend a bajillion dollars on bike lanes, then the streets are extremely dangerous.

But when bicyclists want to take their three year old on their bike for whatever reason, then the streets are not dangerous at all.

Or, possibly, not all bicyclists think exactly alike, and different people are making different arguments in response to different situations. Personally, I always wear a helmet when I ride, as do my kids, and I'd also like the streets to be safer for them and for me. I don't find the arguments against helmet laws persuasive, though I understand that there are some, and I'm fine with increased enforcement there. But I also think you'd improve overall safety more with increased enforcement of car traffic laws.

Yeah, I wear a helmet 99.9% of the time - i.e., whenever I reasonably can. But passing a law that says I am legally required means that when I judge it's ok not to I'm dissuaded from doing so. What if it's a short/safe ride on a CaBi and I don't have a helmet available?

I can't believe bikers aren't required to wear helmets

Motorcyclists are required to wear helmets. The speed limit in the city is 25 MPH. E-bikes can go 25 MPH with the electric motor alone. The current status of law is nonsensical.

The vast majority of bicycling injuries and deaths under the age of 20 could be prevented by wearing a helmet. Yet I routinely see children on bikes or, even worse, ebikes with no helmets.

"An average of 247 traumatic brain injury deaths and 140,000 head injuries among children and adolescents younger than 20 years were related to bicycle crashes each year in the United States. As many as 184 deaths and 116,000 head injuries might have been prevented annually if these riders had worn helmets. An additional 19,000 mouth and chin injuries were treated each year."

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/8909479/

where do you routinely see this? DC? I almost never see bikers without helmets, of any age.

I’ve never seen a single CaBi user wearing a helmet.

CaBinis also pretty low risk. Those are slow upright bikes. It's not like they're racing with clipped in pedals.

And…? This is an irrelevant point to whether or not someone never sees someone wearing a helmet.

It's relevant if you care about the risk of head injury. Do you ask if pedestrians wear helmets?

In the Netherlands, a study found that at speeds below 15 MPH in normal traffic conditions, helmets significantly reduced the risk of traumatic brain injury. Do you have any other b.s. that you would like to peddle?
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8240888/

Let's get the same level of traffic safety here that we have in the Netherlands before you try to make comparisons

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The vast majority of bicycling injuries and deaths under the age of 20 could be prevented by wearing a helmet. Yet I routinely see children on bikes or, even worse, ebikes with no helmets.

"An average of 247 traumatic brain injury deaths and 140,000 head injuries among children and adolescents younger than 20 years were related to bicycle crashes each year in the United States. As many as 184 deaths and 116,000 head injuries might have been prevented annually if these riders had worn helmets. An additional 19,000 mouth and chin injuries were treated each year."

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/8909479/

I wear a helmet and my kids wear helmets (so far). I also wonder how many of those injuries would be prevented if someone didn't drive into them.

100 percent of them would be avoided if parents didn't put their kids in harm's way.

Do you also not let your kids swim or bathe? Think of the drowning risk!

I'm confused.

I thought you said the roads of D.C. are incredibly dangerous because everyone is going 70 mph and no one obeys any traffic rules and drivers are complete sociopaths with no regard for human life and police don't enforce anything and it's all just a complete free for all.

Now, you're telling me that allowing children to venture into all of that is no more dangerous than taking a bath?

The answer is that when bicyclists want the city to radically increase congestion and spend a bajillion dollars on bike lanes, then the streets are extremely dangerous.

But when bicyclists want to take their three year old on their bike for whatever reason, then the streets are not dangerous at all.

Or, possibly, not all bicyclists think exactly alike, and different people are making different arguments in response to different situations. Personally, I always wear a helmet when I ride, as do my kids, and I'd also like the streets to be safer for them and for me. I don't find the arguments against helmet laws persuasive, though I understand that there are some, and I'm fine with increased enforcement there. But I also think you'd improve overall safety more with increased enforcement of car traffic laws.

Yeah, I wear a helmet 99.9% of the time - i.e., whenever I reasonably can. But passing a law that says I am legally required means that when I judge it's ok not to I'm dissuaded from doing so. What if it's a short/safe ride on a CaBi and I don't have a helmet available?

I can't believe bikers aren't required to wear helmets

Motorcyclists are required to wear helmets. The speed limit in the city is 25 MPH. E-bikes can go 25 MPH with the electric motor alone. The current status of law is nonsensical.

The vast majority of bicycling injuries and deaths under the age of 20 could be prevented by wearing a helmet. Yet I routinely see children on bikes or, even worse, ebikes with no helmets.

"An average of 247 traumatic brain injury deaths and 140,000 head injuries among children and adolescents younger than 20 years were related to bicycle crashes each year in the United States. As many as 184 deaths and 116,000 head injuries might have been prevented annually if these riders had worn helmets. An additional 19,000 mouth and chin injuries were treated each year."

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/8909479/

where do you routinely see this? DC? I almost never see bikers without helmets, of any age.

I’ve never seen a single CaBi user wearing a helmet.

CaBinis also pretty low risk. Those are slow upright bikes. It's not like they're racing with clipped in pedals.

And…? This is an irrelevant point to whether or not someone never sees someone wearing a helmet.

It's relevant if you care about the risk of head injury. Do you ask if pedestrians wear helmets?

In the Netherlands, a study found that at speeds below 15 MPH in normal traffic conditions, helmets significantly reduced the risk of traumatic brain injury. Do you have any other b.s. that you would like to peddle?
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8240888/

Let's get the same level of traffic safety here that we have in the Netherlands before you try to make comparisons

So if the U.S. has even less traffic safety, then that would make the case stronger for helmets. I’m not sure that you are thinking this through chief.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The vast majority of bicycling injuries and deaths under the age of 20 could be prevented by wearing a helmet. Yet I routinely see children on bikes or, even worse, ebikes with no helmets.

"An average of 247 traumatic brain injury deaths and 140,000 head injuries among children and adolescents younger than 20 years were related to bicycle crashes each year in the United States. As many as 184 deaths and 116,000 head injuries might have been prevented annually if these riders had worn helmets. An additional 19,000 mouth and chin injuries were treated each year."

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/8909479/

I wear a helmet and my kids wear helmets (so far). I also wonder how many of those injuries would be prevented if someone didn't drive into them.

100 percent of them would be avoided if parents didn't put their kids in harm's way.

Do you also not let your kids swim or bathe? Think of the drowning risk!

I'm confused.

I thought you said the roads of D.C. are incredibly dangerous because everyone is going 70 mph and no one obeys any traffic rules and drivers are complete sociopaths with no regard for human life and police don't enforce anything and it's all just a complete free for all.

Now, you're telling me that allowing children to venture into all of that is no more dangerous than taking a bath?

The answer is that when bicyclists want the city to radically increase congestion and spend a bajillion dollars on bike lanes, then the streets are extremely dangerous.

But when bicyclists want to take their three year old on their bike for whatever reason, then the streets are not dangerous at all.

Or, possibly, not all bicyclists think exactly alike, and different people are making different arguments in response to different situations. Personally, I always wear a helmet when I ride, as do my kids, and I'd also like the streets to be safer for them and for me. I don't find the arguments against helmet laws persuasive, though I understand that there are some, and I'm fine with increased enforcement there. But I also think you'd improve overall safety more with increased enforcement of car traffic laws.

Yeah, I wear a helmet 99.9% of the time - i.e., whenever I reasonably can. But passing a law that says I am legally required means that when I judge it's ok not to I'm dissuaded from doing so. What if it's a short/safe ride on a CaBi and I don't have a helmet available?

I can't believe bikers aren't required to wear helmets

Motorcyclists are required to wear helmets. The speed limit in the city is 25 MPH. E-bikes can go 25 MPH with the electric motor alone. The current status of law is nonsensical.

The vast majority of bicycling injuries and deaths under the age of 20 could be prevented by wearing a helmet. Yet I routinely see children on bikes or, even worse, ebikes with no helmets.

"An average of 247 traumatic brain injury deaths and 140,000 head injuries among children and adolescents younger than 20 years were related to bicycle crashes each year in the United States. As many as 184 deaths and 116,000 head injuries might have been prevented annually if these riders had worn helmets. An additional 19,000 mouth and chin injuries were treated each year."

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/8909479/

where do you routinely see this? DC? I almost never see bikers without helmets, of any age.

I’ve never seen a single CaBi user wearing a helmet.

CaBinis also pretty low risk. Those are slow upright bikes. It's not like they're racing with clipped in pedals.

And…? This is an irrelevant point to whether or not someone never sees someone wearing a helmet.

It's relevant if you care about the risk of head injury. Do you ask if pedestrians wear helmets?

In the Netherlands, a study found that at speeds below 15 MPH in normal traffic conditions, helmets significantly reduced the risk of traumatic brain injury. Do you have any other b.s. that you would like to peddle?
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8240888/

Let's get the same level of traffic safety here that we have in the Netherlands before you try to make comparisons

So if the U.S. has even less traffic safety, then that would make the case stronger for helmets. I’m not sure that you are thinking this through chief.

I'm not against helmets. I just think helmet mandates are not the low hanging fruit you think they are.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The vast majority of bicycling injuries and deaths under the age of 20 could be prevented by wearing a helmet. Yet I routinely see children on bikes or, even worse, ebikes with no helmets.

"An average of 247 traumatic brain injury deaths and 140,000 head injuries among children and adolescents younger than 20 years were related to bicycle crashes each year in the United States. As many as 184 deaths and 116,000 head injuries might have been prevented annually if these riders had worn helmets. An additional 19,000 mouth and chin injuries were treated each year."

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/8909479/

I wear a helmet and my kids wear helmets (so far). I also wonder how many of those injuries would be prevented if someone didn't drive into them.

100 percent of them would be avoided if parents didn't put their kids in harm's way.

Do you also not let your kids swim or bathe? Think of the drowning risk!

I'm confused.

I thought you said the roads of D.C. are incredibly dangerous because everyone is going 70 mph and no one obeys any traffic rules and drivers are complete sociopaths with no regard for human life and police don't enforce anything and it's all just a complete free for all.

Now, you're telling me that allowing children to venture into all of that is no more dangerous than taking a bath?

The answer is that when bicyclists want the city to radically increase congestion and spend a bajillion dollars on bike lanes, then the streets are extremely dangerous.

But when bicyclists want to take their three year old on their bike for whatever reason, then the streets are not dangerous at all.

Or, possibly, not all bicyclists think exactly alike, and different people are making different arguments in response to different situations. Personally, I always wear a helmet when I ride, as do my kids, and I'd also like the streets to be safer for them and for me. I don't find the arguments against helmet laws persuasive, though I understand that there are some, and I'm fine with increased enforcement there. But I also think you'd improve overall safety more with increased enforcement of car traffic laws.

Yeah, I wear a helmet 99.9% of the time - i.e., whenever I reasonably can. But passing a law that says I am legally required means that when I judge it's ok not to I'm dissuaded from doing so. What if it's a short/safe ride on a CaBi and I don't have a helmet available?

I can't believe bikers aren't required to wear helmets

Motorcyclists are required to wear helmets. The speed limit in the city is 25 MPH. E-bikes can go 25 MPH with the electric motor alone. The current status of law is nonsensical.

The vast majority of bicycling injuries and deaths under the age of 20 could be prevented by wearing a helmet. Yet I routinely see children on bikes or, even worse, ebikes with no helmets.

"An average of 247 traumatic brain injury deaths and 140,000 head injuries among children and adolescents younger than 20 years were related to bicycle crashes each year in the United States. As many as 184 deaths and 116,000 head injuries might have been prevented annually if these riders had worn helmets. An additional 19,000 mouth and chin injuries were treated each year."

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/8909479/

where do you routinely see this? DC? I almost never see bikers without helmets, of any age.

I’ve never seen a single CaBi user wearing a helmet.

CaBinis also pretty low risk. Those are slow upright bikes. It's not like they're racing with clipped in pedals.

And…? This is an irrelevant point to whether or not someone never sees someone wearing a helmet.

It's relevant if you care about the risk of head injury. Do you ask if pedestrians wear helmets?

In the Netherlands, a study found that at speeds below 15 MPH in normal traffic conditions, helmets significantly reduced the risk of traumatic brain injury. Do you have any other b.s. that you would like to peddle?
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8240888/

Let's get the same level of traffic safety here that we have in the Netherlands before you try to make comparisons

So if the U.S. has even less traffic safety, then that would make the case stronger for helmets. I’m not sure that you are thinking this through chief.

Helmets are designed to mitigate injury from a fall — not being run over by a 4000 pound car.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The vast majority of bicycling injuries and deaths under the age of 20 could be prevented by wearing a helmet. Yet I routinely see children on bikes or, even worse, ebikes with no helmets.

"An average of 247 traumatic brain injury deaths and 140,000 head injuries among children and adolescents younger than 20 years were related to bicycle crashes each year in the United States. As many as 184 deaths and 116,000 head injuries might have been prevented annually if these riders had worn helmets. An additional 19,000 mouth and chin injuries were treated each year."

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/8909479/

I wear a helmet and my kids wear helmets (so far). I also wonder how many of those injuries would be prevented if someone didn't drive into them.

100 percent of them would be avoided if parents didn't put their kids in harm's way.

Do you also not let your kids swim or bathe? Think of the drowning risk!

I'm confused.

I thought you said the roads of D.C. are incredibly dangerous because everyone is going 70 mph and no one obeys any traffic rules and drivers are complete sociopaths with no regard for human life and police don't enforce anything and it's all just a complete free for all.

Now, you're telling me that allowing children to venture into all of that is no more dangerous than taking a bath?

The answer is that when bicyclists want the city to radically increase congestion and spend a bajillion dollars on bike lanes, then the streets are extremely dangerous.

But when bicyclists want to take their three year old on their bike for whatever reason, then the streets are not dangerous at all.

Or, possibly, not all bicyclists think exactly alike, and different people are making different arguments in response to different situations. Personally, I always wear a helmet when I ride, as do my kids, and I'd also like the streets to be safer for them and for me. I don't find the arguments against helmet laws persuasive, though I understand that there are some, and I'm fine with increased enforcement there. But I also think you'd improve overall safety more with increased enforcement of car traffic laws.

Yeah, I wear a helmet 99.9% of the time - i.e., whenever I reasonably can. But passing a law that says I am legally required means that when I judge it's ok not to I'm dissuaded from doing so. What if it's a short/safe ride on a CaBi and I don't have a helmet available?

I can't believe bikers aren't required to wear helmets

Motorcyclists are required to wear helmets. The speed limit in the city is 25 MPH. E-bikes can go 25 MPH with the electric motor alone. The current status of law is nonsensical.

The vast majority of bicycling injuries and deaths under the age of 20 could be prevented by wearing a helmet. Yet I routinely see children on bikes or, even worse, ebikes with no helmets.

"An average of 247 traumatic brain injury deaths and 140,000 head injuries among children and adolescents younger than 20 years were related to bicycle crashes each year in the United States. As many as 184 deaths and 116,000 head injuries might have been prevented annually if these riders had worn helmets. An additional 19,000 mouth and chin injuries were treated each year."

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/8909479/

where do you routinely see this? DC? I almost never see bikers without helmets, of any age.

I’ve never seen a single CaBi user wearing a helmet.

CaBinis also pretty low risk. Those are slow upright bikes. It's not like they're racing with clipped in pedals.

And…? This is an irrelevant point to whether or not someone never sees someone wearing a helmet.

It's relevant if you care about the risk of head injury. Do you ask if pedestrians wear helmets?

In the Netherlands, a study found that at speeds below 15 MPH in normal traffic conditions, helmets significantly reduced the risk of traumatic brain injury. Do you have any other b.s. that you would like to peddle?
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8240888/

Let's get the same level of traffic safety here that we have in the Netherlands before you try to make comparisons

So if the U.S. has even less traffic safety, then that would make the case stronger for helmets. I’m not sure that you are thinking this through chief.

Helmets are designed to mitigate injury from a fall — not being run over by a 4000 pound car.

That's why I feel like the people bringing them up are concern trolling, not actually concerned.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The vast majority of bicycling injuries and deaths under the age of 20 could be prevented by wearing a helmet. Yet I routinely see children on bikes or, even worse, ebikes with no helmets.

"An average of 247 traumatic brain injury deaths and 140,000 head injuries among children and adolescents younger than 20 years were related to bicycle crashes each year in the United States. As many as 184 deaths and 116,000 head injuries might have been prevented annually if these riders had worn helmets. An additional 19,000 mouth and chin injuries were treated each year."

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/8909479/

I wear a helmet and my kids wear helmets (so far). I also wonder how many of those injuries would be prevented if someone didn't drive into them.

100 percent of them would be avoided if parents didn't put their kids in harm's way.

Do you also not let your kids swim or bathe? Think of the drowning risk!

I'm confused.

I thought you said the roads of D.C. are incredibly dangerous because everyone is going 70 mph and no one obeys any traffic rules and drivers are complete sociopaths with no regard for human life and police don't enforce anything and it's all just a complete free for all.

Now, you're telling me that allowing children to venture into all of that is no more dangerous than taking a bath?

The answer is that when bicyclists want the city to radically increase congestion and spend a bajillion dollars on bike lanes, then the streets are extremely dangerous.

But when bicyclists want to take their three year old on their bike for whatever reason, then the streets are not dangerous at all.

Or, possibly, not all bicyclists think exactly alike, and different people are making different arguments in response to different situations. Personally, I always wear a helmet when I ride, as do my kids, and I'd also like the streets to be safer for them and for me. I don't find the arguments against helmet laws persuasive, though I understand that there are some, and I'm fine with increased enforcement there. But I also think you'd improve overall safety more with increased enforcement of car traffic laws.

Yeah, I wear a helmet 99.9% of the time - i.e., whenever I reasonably can. But passing a law that says I am legally required means that when I judge it's ok not to I'm dissuaded from doing so. What if it's a short/safe ride on a CaBi and I don't have a helmet available?

I can't believe bikers aren't required to wear helmets

Motorcyclists are required to wear helmets. The speed limit in the city is 25 MPH. E-bikes can go 25 MPH with the electric motor alone. The current status of law is nonsensical.

The vast majority of bicycling injuries and deaths under the age of 20 could be prevented by wearing a helmet. Yet I routinely see children on bikes or, even worse, ebikes with no helmets.

"An average of 247 traumatic brain injury deaths and 140,000 head injuries among children and adolescents younger than 20 years were related to bicycle crashes each year in the United States. As many as 184 deaths and 116,000 head injuries might have been prevented annually if these riders had worn helmets. An additional 19,000 mouth and chin injuries were treated each year."

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/8909479/

where do you routinely see this? DC? I almost never see bikers without helmets, of any age.

I’ve never seen a single CaBi user wearing a helmet.

CaBinis also pretty low risk. Those are slow upright bikes. It's not like they're racing with clipped in pedals.

And…? This is an irrelevant point to whether or not someone never sees someone wearing a helmet.

It's relevant if you care about the risk of head injury. Do you ask if pedestrians wear helmets?

In the Netherlands, a study found that at speeds below 15 MPH in normal traffic conditions, helmets significantly reduced the risk of traumatic brain injury. Do you have any other b.s. that you would like to peddle?
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8240888/

Let's get the same level of traffic safety here that we have in the Netherlands before you try to make comparisons

So if the U.S. has even less traffic safety, then that would make the case stronger for helmets. I’m not sure that you are thinking this through chief.

Helmets are designed to mitigate injury from a fall — not being run over by a 4000 pound car.

Do you honestly believe that the only bicycle accidents occur involve people being run over by cars?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The vast majority of bicycling injuries and deaths under the age of 20 could be prevented by wearing a helmet. Yet I routinely see children on bikes or, even worse, ebikes with no helmets.

"An average of 247 traumatic brain injury deaths and 140,000 head injuries among children and adolescents younger than 20 years were related to bicycle crashes each year in the United States. As many as 184 deaths and 116,000 head injuries might have been prevented annually if these riders had worn helmets. An additional 19,000 mouth and chin injuries were treated each year."

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/8909479/

I wear a helmet and my kids wear helmets (so far). I also wonder how many of those injuries would be prevented if someone didn't drive into them.

100 percent of them would be avoided if parents didn't put their kids in harm's way.

Do you also not let your kids swim or bathe? Think of the drowning risk!

I'm confused.

I thought you said the roads of D.C. are incredibly dangerous because everyone is going 70 mph and no one obeys any traffic rules and drivers are complete sociopaths with no regard for human life and police don't enforce anything and it's all just a complete free for all.

Now, you're telling me that allowing children to venture into all of that is no more dangerous than taking a bath?

The answer is that when bicyclists want the city to radically increase congestion and spend a bajillion dollars on bike lanes, then the streets are extremely dangerous.

But when bicyclists want to take their three year old on their bike for whatever reason, then the streets are not dangerous at all.

Or, possibly, not all bicyclists think exactly alike, and different people are making different arguments in response to different situations. Personally, I always wear a helmet when I ride, as do my kids, and I'd also like the streets to be safer for them and for me. I don't find the arguments against helmet laws persuasive, though I understand that there are some, and I'm fine with increased enforcement there. But I also think you'd improve overall safety more with increased enforcement of car traffic laws.

Yeah, I wear a helmet 99.9% of the time - i.e., whenever I reasonably can. But passing a law that says I am legally required means that when I judge it's ok not to I'm dissuaded from doing so. What if it's a short/safe ride on a CaBi and I don't have a helmet available?

I can't believe bikers aren't required to wear helmets

Motorcyclists are required to wear helmets. The speed limit in the city is 25 MPH. E-bikes can go 25 MPH with the electric motor alone. The current status of law is nonsensical.

The vast majority of bicycling injuries and deaths under the age of 20 could be prevented by wearing a helmet. Yet I routinely see children on bikes or, even worse, ebikes with no helmets.

"An average of 247 traumatic brain injury deaths and 140,000 head injuries among children and adolescents younger than 20 years were related to bicycle crashes each year in the United States. As many as 184 deaths and 116,000 head injuries might have been prevented annually if these riders had worn helmets. An additional 19,000 mouth and chin injuries were treated each year."

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/8909479/

where do you routinely see this? DC? I almost never see bikers without helmets, of any age.

I’ve never seen a single CaBi user wearing a helmet.

CaBinis also pretty low risk. Those are slow upright bikes. It's not like they're racing with clipped in pedals.

And…? This is an irrelevant point to whether or not someone never sees someone wearing a helmet.

It's relevant if you care about the risk of head injury. Do you ask if pedestrians wear helmets?

In the Netherlands, a study found that at speeds below 15 MPH in normal traffic conditions, helmets significantly reduced the risk of traumatic brain injury. Do you have any other b.s. that you would like to peddle?
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8240888/

Let's get the same level of traffic safety here that we have in the Netherlands before you try to make comparisons

So if the U.S. has even less traffic safety, then that would make the case stronger for helmets. I’m not sure that you are thinking this through chief.

Helmets are designed to mitigate injury from a fall — not being run over by a 4000 pound car.

Do you honestly believe that the only bicycle accidents occur involve people being run over by cars?

I somehow seemed to have missed the car that ran over the President. I guess that helmet he was wearing while riding at low speed was pointless.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The vast majority of bicycling injuries and deaths under the age of 20 could be prevented by wearing a helmet. Yet I routinely see children on bikes or, even worse, ebikes with no helmets.

"An average of 247 traumatic brain injury deaths and 140,000 head injuries among children and adolescents younger than 20 years were related to bicycle crashes each year in the United States. As many as 184 deaths and 116,000 head injuries might have been prevented annually if these riders had worn helmets. An additional 19,000 mouth and chin injuries were treated each year."

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/8909479/

I wear a helmet and my kids wear helmets (so far). I also wonder how many of those injuries would be prevented if someone didn't drive into them.

100 percent of them would be avoided if parents didn't put their kids in harm's way.

Do you also not let your kids swim or bathe? Think of the drowning risk!

I'm confused.

I thought you said the roads of D.C. are incredibly dangerous because everyone is going 70 mph and no one obeys any traffic rules and drivers are complete sociopaths with no regard for human life and police don't enforce anything and it's all just a complete free for all.

Now, you're telling me that allowing children to venture into all of that is no more dangerous than taking a bath?

The answer is that when bicyclists want the city to radically increase congestion and spend a bajillion dollars on bike lanes, then the streets are extremely dangerous.

But when bicyclists want to take their three year old on their bike for whatever reason, then the streets are not dangerous at all.

Or, possibly, not all bicyclists think exactly alike, and different people are making different arguments in response to different situations. Personally, I always wear a helmet when I ride, as do my kids, and I'd also like the streets to be safer for them and for me. I don't find the arguments against helmet laws persuasive, though I understand that there are some, and I'm fine with increased enforcement there. But I also think you'd improve overall safety more with increased enforcement of car traffic laws.

Yeah, I wear a helmet 99.9% of the time - i.e., whenever I reasonably can. But passing a law that says I am legally required means that when I judge it's ok not to I'm dissuaded from doing so. What if it's a short/safe ride on a CaBi and I don't have a helmet available?

I can't believe bikers aren't required to wear helmets

Motorcyclists are required to wear helmets. The speed limit in the city is 25 MPH. E-bikes can go 25 MPH with the electric motor alone. The current status of law is nonsensical.

The vast majority of bicycling injuries and deaths under the age of 20 could be prevented by wearing a helmet. Yet I routinely see children on bikes or, even worse, ebikes with no helmets.

"An average of 247 traumatic brain injury deaths and 140,000 head injuries among children and adolescents younger than 20 years were related to bicycle crashes each year in the United States. As many as 184 deaths and 116,000 head injuries might have been prevented annually if these riders had worn helmets. An additional 19,000 mouth and chin injuries were treated each year."

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/8909479/

where do you routinely see this? DC? I almost never see bikers without helmets, of any age.

I’ve never seen a single CaBi user wearing a helmet.

CaBinis also pretty low risk. Those are slow upright bikes. It's not like they're racing with clipped in pedals.

And…? This is an irrelevant point to whether or not someone never sees someone wearing a helmet.

It's relevant if you care about the risk of head injury. Do you ask if pedestrians wear helmets?

In the Netherlands, a study found that at speeds below 15 MPH in normal traffic conditions, helmets significantly reduced the risk of traumatic brain injury. Do you have any other b.s. that you would like to peddle?
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8240888/

Let's get the same level of traffic safety here that we have in the Netherlands before you try to make comparisons

So if the U.S. has even less traffic safety, then that would make the case stronger for helmets. I’m not sure that you are thinking this through chief.

Helmets are designed to mitigate injury from a fall — not being run over by a 4000 pound car.

This. They're not even designed for falling off of a bike at speed. For kids just learning to bike, who fall a lot at low speed, they provide significant protection. For experienced cyclists the benefits are way oversold. Researchers have been trying to find proof of the efficacy of bike helmets for decades and it has proven to be elusive. The statistical benefits of seatbelt use are so readily apparent that there was a great desire to find the same kind of benefit with helmets, but it's just not there.*

Note that in the study out of the Netherlands that is being bandied about researchers eliminated all cyclists from the study who were travelling faster than 25 KM/h (15 mph). They also found that among cyclists who had been hit by a car there was no correlation between helmet use and outcomes.

Helmets help slow cyclists who fall off their bike.

*(Something very similar happened with coffee. Sixty years ago, when researchers first started applying statistical methods they quickly found health risks associated with with smoking and alcohol use. They then turned their focus onto coffee, and have spent six decades trying to find the same sort of effect, fruitlessly).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The vast majority of bicycling injuries and deaths under the age of 20 could be prevented by wearing a helmet. Yet I routinely see children on bikes or, even worse, ebikes with no helmets.

"An average of 247 traumatic brain injury deaths and 140,000 head injuries among children and adolescents younger than 20 years were related to bicycle crashes each year in the United States. As many as 184 deaths and 116,000 head injuries might have been prevented annually if these riders had worn helmets. An additional 19,000 mouth and chin injuries were treated each year."

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/8909479/

I wear a helmet and my kids wear helmets (so far). I also wonder how many of those injuries would be prevented if someone didn't drive into them.

100 percent of them would be avoided if parents didn't put their kids in harm's way.

Do you also not let your kids swim or bathe? Think of the drowning risk!

I'm confused.

I thought you said the roads of D.C. are incredibly dangerous because everyone is going 70 mph and no one obeys any traffic rules and drivers are complete sociopaths with no regard for human life and police don't enforce anything and it's all just a complete free for all.

Now, you're telling me that allowing children to venture into all of that is no more dangerous than taking a bath?

The answer is that when bicyclists want the city to radically increase congestion and spend a bajillion dollars on bike lanes, then the streets are extremely dangerous.

But when bicyclists want to take their three year old on their bike for whatever reason, then the streets are not dangerous at all.

Or, possibly, not all bicyclists think exactly alike, and different people are making different arguments in response to different situations. Personally, I always wear a helmet when I ride, as do my kids, and I'd also like the streets to be safer for them and for me. I don't find the arguments against helmet laws persuasive, though I understand that there are some, and I'm fine with increased enforcement there. But I also think you'd improve overall safety more with increased enforcement of car traffic laws.

Yeah, I wear a helmet 99.9% of the time - i.e., whenever I reasonably can. But passing a law that says I am legally required means that when I judge it's ok not to I'm dissuaded from doing so. What if it's a short/safe ride on a CaBi and I don't have a helmet available?

I can't believe bikers aren't required to wear helmets

Motorcyclists are required to wear helmets. The speed limit in the city is 25 MPH. E-bikes can go 25 MPH with the electric motor alone. The current status of law is nonsensical.

The vast majority of bicycling injuries and deaths under the age of 20 could be prevented by wearing a helmet. Yet I routinely see children on bikes or, even worse, ebikes with no helmets.

"An average of 247 traumatic brain injury deaths and 140,000 head injuries among children and adolescents younger than 20 years were related to bicycle crashes each year in the United States. As many as 184 deaths and 116,000 head injuries might have been prevented annually if these riders had worn helmets. An additional 19,000 mouth and chin injuries were treated each year."

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/8909479/

where do you routinely see this? DC? I almost never see bikers without helmets, of any age.

I’ve never seen a single CaBi user wearing a helmet.

CaBinis also pretty low risk. Those are slow upright bikes. It's not like they're racing with clipped in pedals.

And…? This is an irrelevant point to whether or not someone never sees someone wearing a helmet.

It's relevant if you care about the risk of head injury. Do you ask if pedestrians wear helmets?

In the Netherlands, a study found that at speeds below 15 MPH in normal traffic conditions, helmets significantly reduced the risk of traumatic brain injury. Do you have any other b.s. that you would like to peddle?
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8240888/

Let's get the same level of traffic safety here that we have in the Netherlands before you try to make comparisons

So if the U.S. has even less traffic safety, then that would make the case stronger for helmets. I’m not sure that you are thinking this through chief.

Helmets are designed to mitigate injury from a fall — not being run over by a 4000 pound car.

This. They're not even designed for falling off of a bike at speed. For kids just learning to bike, who fall a lot at low speed, they provide significant protection. For experienced cyclists the benefits are way oversold. Researchers have been trying to find proof of the efficacy of bike helmets for decades and it has proven to be elusive. The statistical benefits of seatbelt use are so readily apparent that there was a great desire to find the same kind of benefit with helmets, but it's just not there.*

Note that in the study out of the Netherlands that is being bandied about researchers eliminated all cyclists from the study who were travelling faster than 25 KM/h (15 mph). They also found that among cyclists who had been hit by a car there was no correlation between helmet use and outcomes.

Helmets help slow cyclists who fall off their bike.

*(Something very similar happened with coffee. Sixty years ago, when researchers first started applying statistical methods they quickly found health risks associated with with smoking and alcohol use. They then turned their focus onto coffee, and have spent six decades trying to find the same sort of effect, fruitlessly).

I remember once the lawyers got their payday from Big Tobacco, articles started cropping up about the dangers of secondhand caffeine.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The vast majority of bicycling injuries and deaths under the age of 20 could be prevented by wearing a helmet. Yet I routinely see children on bikes or, even worse, ebikes with no helmets.

"An average of 247 traumatic brain injury deaths and 140,000 head injuries among children and adolescents younger than 20 years were related to bicycle crashes each year in the United States. As many as 184 deaths and 116,000 head injuries might have been prevented annually if these riders had worn helmets. An additional 19,000 mouth and chin injuries were treated each year."

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/8909479/

I wear a helmet and my kids wear helmets (so far). I also wonder how many of those injuries would be prevented if someone didn't drive into them.

100 percent of them would be avoided if parents didn't put their kids in harm's way.

Do you also not let your kids swim or bathe? Think of the drowning risk!

I'm confused.

I thought you said the roads of D.C. are incredibly dangerous because everyone is going 70 mph and no one obeys any traffic rules and drivers are complete sociopaths with no regard for human life and police don't enforce anything and it's all just a complete free for all.

Now, you're telling me that allowing children to venture into all of that is no more dangerous than taking a bath?

The answer is that when bicyclists want the city to radically increase congestion and spend a bajillion dollars on bike lanes, then the streets are extremely dangerous.

But when bicyclists want to take their three year old on their bike for whatever reason, then the streets are not dangerous at all.

Or, possibly, not all bicyclists think exactly alike, and different people are making different arguments in response to different situations. Personally, I always wear a helmet when I ride, as do my kids, and I'd also like the streets to be safer for them and for me. I don't find the arguments against helmet laws persuasive, though I understand that there are some, and I'm fine with increased enforcement there. But I also think you'd improve overall safety more with increased enforcement of car traffic laws.

Yeah, I wear a helmet 99.9% of the time - i.e., whenever I reasonably can. But passing a law that says I am legally required means that when I judge it's ok not to I'm dissuaded from doing so. What if it's a short/safe ride on a CaBi and I don't have a helmet available?

I can't believe bikers aren't required to wear helmets

Motorcyclists are required to wear helmets. The speed limit in the city is 25 MPH. E-bikes can go 25 MPH with the electric motor alone. The current status of law is nonsensical.

The vast majority of bicycling injuries and deaths under the age of 20 could be prevented by wearing a helmet. Yet I routinely see children on bikes or, even worse, ebikes with no helmets.

"An average of 247 traumatic brain injury deaths and 140,000 head injuries among children and adolescents younger than 20 years were related to bicycle crashes each year in the United States. As many as 184 deaths and 116,000 head injuries might have been prevented annually if these riders had worn helmets. An additional 19,000 mouth and chin injuries were treated each year."

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/8909479/

where do you routinely see this? DC? I almost never see bikers without helmets, of any age.

I’ve never seen a single CaBi user wearing a helmet.

CaBinis also pretty low risk. Those are slow upright bikes. It's not like they're racing with clipped in pedals.

And…? This is an irrelevant point to whether or not someone never sees someone wearing a helmet.

It's relevant if you care about the risk of head injury. Do you ask if pedestrians wear helmets?

In the Netherlands, a study found that at speeds below 15 MPH in normal traffic conditions, helmets significantly reduced the risk of traumatic brain injury. Do you have any other b.s. that you would like to peddle?
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8240888/

Let's get the same level of traffic safety here that we have in the Netherlands before you try to make comparisons

So if the U.S. has even less traffic safety, then that would make the case stronger for helmets. I’m not sure that you are thinking this through chief.

Helmets are designed to mitigate injury from a fall — not being run over by a 4000 pound car.

This. They're not even designed for falling off of a bike at speed. For kids just learning to bike, who fall a lot at low speed, they provide significant protection. For experienced cyclists the benefits are way oversold. Researchers have been trying to find proof of the efficacy of bike helmets for decades and it has proven to be elusive. The statistical benefits of seatbelt use are so readily apparent that there was a great desire to find the same kind of benefit with helmets, but it's just not there.*

Note that in the study out of the Netherlands that is being bandied about researchers eliminated all cyclists from the study who were travelling faster than 25 KM/h (15 mph). They also found that among cyclists who had been hit by a car there was no correlation between helmet use and outcomes.

Helmets help slow cyclists who fall off their bike.

*(Something very similar happened with coffee. Sixty years ago, when researchers first started applying statistical methods they quickly found health risks associated with with smoking and alcohol use. They then turned their focus onto coffee, and have spent six decades trying to find the same sort of effect, fruitlessly).

It's incredible how intent you are on giving yourselves brain damage.

"wearing a helmet can reduce the force of a head impact during an accident occurring at 30 miles per hour to the force of a head impact occurring at 7 miles per hour"
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/10/121002101532.htm

Contrary to your odd beliefs, wearing helmets are safer than not wearing helmets. It's funny that you mention tobacco, because the types of bizarre psuedo-scientific contrarianism you promote is exactly what the kinds of research the tobacco companies would fund to demonstrate that cigarettes are safe.

[Anonymous]

Your concern trolling is duly noted.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Your concern trolling is duly noted.

If I understand correctly, you believe that you are less safe wearing a helmet? And that’s because if you don’t wear a helmet you are more alert?

This is such a dumb argument, it’s like saying construction workers at heights would be more safe without harnesses.

You might already have brain damage.