It turns out that bicycle helmets do reduce head injuries

[Quantum Windbag]

Too Bad QW didn't wear his helmet, he seems to have a Gary Busey level brain injury...

I actually posted a study that backs my position up, what have you got again?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Unless they're eating them, a la Chris Christy, bicycle helmets are not making kids fat.

Ingesting more calories than they expend - THAT is what makes kids (and adults) fat.

Unless you are walking, trip, and manage to fall on your head, bicycle helmets do not prevent head injuries, what's your point?

Unfortunately it is too late for a helmet to help for you. The damage is done, and irreversible.

It makes ZERO sense to be against kids wearing a helmet when riding their bike or skateboard. But sense is something you totally lack.

I never said I was against it. I am against the government mandating it, there is a difference.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

While wearing a helmet is a good idea. I dont believe the gov should have any say in the matter.
It's amazing that we survived childhood if you believe all the crap the gov wants to mandate.

I can understand where you're coming from. But there is always a cost to society that the 'individual rights' guy never thinks about.

People without health insurance is a prime example. Everyone's insurance premium is at least $1,000 per year more because of it.

The effect of liberty to individuals is that they may do what they please: we ought to see what it will please them to do, before we risk congratulations.
Edmund Burke

There is a cost to society that the government mandate guy flat out ignores. Personally, I would rather pay the cost of individual liberty than the one of tyranny.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

While wearing a helmet is a good idea. I dont believe the gov should have any say in the matter.
It's amazing that we survived childhood if you believe all the crap the gov wants to mandate.

There was a time when cars didn't have seatbelts. Then seatbelts were put in. Then, later, using them was required by law. They save lives. Bicycle helmets save children from brain injury. What is bad about that?????

Didn't read the study, did you? Maybe if you did you would see what is bad about that beyond the fact that the government is taking away freedom.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

FACT. Wearing a bicycle helmet DID save my cousin's life years go.

Have you noticed all the talk about concussions and the NFL? Have you noticed that all of them wear helmets that are a lot better than any bicycle helmet and that they are all traveling a lot slower than a person on bicycle? If those helmets do not protect them, what makes you think bicycle helmets protect people on a bicycle?

Numerous studies have shown that bicycle helmets only protect against slow speed impacts to the crown of the head. In other words, unless you are walking, and manage to fall on the top of your head, they are pretty much useless. To actually be effective they would need to be designed like motorcycle helmets, which would make them too heavy and hot for a bicyclist to wear.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

There was a time when cars didn't have seatbelts. Then seatbelts were put in. Then, later, using them was required by law. They save lives. Bicycle helmets save children from brain injury. What is bad about that?????

Like I said. It's a good idea to wear one. But I dont believe it's the govs place to mandate such things.
I raced bicycles both on the street and dirt. And yes I wore a helmet while doing so.
Riding around the neighborhood? No. Thats akin to wearing a helmet to go for a stroll.

Kids are stupid

Doesn't make a difference if they are riding around the block or on the interstate. They still don't pay attention

True kids can be stupid. But during all those years of cycling I never new a single person who received more then a knot on their noggin. And I spent most of my time hanging out with cyclist.
If it were my kid? Yes he or she would wear a helmet. But I dont need the gov to tell me that.
For the same reason I dont need the gov to tell me to wear a seatbelt.

 

[Bfgrn]

While wearing a helmet is a good idea. I dont believe the gov should have any say in the matter.
It's amazing that we survived childhood if you believe all the crap the gov wants to mandate.

I can understand where you're coming from. But there is always a cost to society that the 'individual rights' guy never thinks about.

People without health insurance is a prime example. Everyone's insurance premium is at least $1,000 per year more because of it.

The effect of liberty to individuals is that they may do what they please: we ought to see what it will please them to do, before we risk congratulations.
Edmund Burke

There is a cost to society that the government mandate guy flat out ignores. Personally, I would rather pay the cost of individual liberty than the one of tyranny.

WOW...tyranny. You are truly a butt hurt type.

 

[Bfgrn]

Like I said. It's a good idea to wear one. But I dont believe it's the govs place to mandate such things.
I raced bicycles both on the street and dirt. And yes I wore a helmet while doing so.
Riding around the neighborhood? No. Thats akin to wearing a helmet to go for a stroll.

Kids are stupid

Doesn't make a difference if they are riding around the block or on the interstate. They still don't pay attention

True kids can be stupid. But during all those years of cycling I never new a single person who received more then a knot on their noggin. And I spent most of my time hanging out with cyclist.
If it were my kid? Yes he or she would wear a helmet. But I dont need the gov to tell me that.
For the same reason I dont need the gov to tell me to wear a seatbelt.

Same with motorcycles I presume? You 'individual rights' guys are really socialists, just too obtuse to understand how and why.

Universal Motorcycle Helmet Laws Reduce Costs to Society

Helmet Laws Reduce Public Payout Helmet laws significantly reduce the strain on public resources. Unhelmeted riders cost more to treat at the hospital, spend a longer time in rehabilitation, and are more likely to require some form of public assistance to for pay medical bills and rehabilitation. In 1991, prior to enacting its helmet law, California's state medical insurance program paid $40 million for the treatment of motorcycle-related head injuries. That figure dropped to $24 million after enactment of a universal helmet law.

It costs nothing to ride without a helmet as long as there is no crash. It is true that wearing a motorcycle helmet will not prevent a crash. But when a crash happens, the freedom to ride unhelmeted is paid for in different ways, by different sources. The motorcyclist pays and the public pays through taxes, insurance rates, and health care costs.

What is the price? Hospitalization and related medical expenses are higher for unhelmeted riders because of brain injuries. Here's what the data tell us:

• The average charge for inpatient care for motorcyclists who sustain a brain injury is more than twice the charge for motorcyclists receiving inpatient care for other injuries.

• The average savings for prevented brain injuries in Hawaii, Maine, Missouri, New York, Pennsylvania, Utah, and Wisconsin was $15,000 in inpatient costs for each incident in the first year.

• The average hospitalization costs for unhelmeted riders were one-third greater than those of helmeted riders ($7,208 to $5,852) in a study of Illinois-injured motorcyclists.

So who does pay the price? A large number of studies have focused on this issue and, although the percentages vary, one central point remains clear: whether as taxpayers or insurance customers or medical consumers, we all pay. For example,

• A privately conducted California study put the average cost of hospital admissions for a non-helmeted rider at $17,704. Of this initial amount, 72 percent of the costs for hospitalization were paid by the State of California, with another 10 percent being paid by other tax-based sources.

• Another study found that 57 percent of the patients listed a government program as the principal payer of in-patient hospital costs resulting from motorcycle crashes.

We may not be able to eliminate all the risk from motorcycling, but helmet laws greatly reduce the most expensive injuries head injuries. Reducing these costs is good for the consumer and it is good for business, too.
Tim Hoyt, Vice President, Safety
Nationwide Insurance Enterprises.

 

[rightwinger]

Like I said. It's a good idea to wear one. But I dont believe it's the govs place to mandate such things.
I raced bicycles both on the street and dirt. And yes I wore a helmet while doing so.
Riding around the neighborhood? No. Thats akin to wearing a helmet to go for a stroll.

Kids are stupid

Doesn't make a difference if they are riding around the block or on the interstate. They still don't pay attention

True kids can be stupid. But during all those years of cycling I never new a single person who received more then a knot on their noggin. And I spent most of my time hanging out with cyclist.
If it were my kid? Yes he or she would wear a helmet. But I dont need the gov to tell me that.
For the same reason I dont need the gov to tell me to wear a seatbelt.

When I started driving at 16, people would be insulted if you got in their car an put your seatbelt on......What's the matter? Don't trust my driving?

Several kids I knew were killed in car accidents when I was in HS. My kids did not have anyone in their class killed. Seat belts save lives and mandatory compliance played a huge part

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

Kids are stupid

Doesn't make a difference if they are riding around the block or on the interstate. They still don't pay attention

True kids can be stupid. But during all those years of cycling I never new a single person who received more then a knot on their noggin. And I spent most of my time hanging out with cyclist.
If it were my kid? Yes he or she would wear a helmet. But I dont need the gov to tell me that.
For the same reason I dont need the gov to tell me to wear a seatbelt.

Same with motorcycles I presume? You 'individual rights' guys are really socialists, just too obtuse to understand how and why.

Universal Motorcycle Helmet Laws Reduce Costs to Society

Helmet Laws Reduce Public Payout Helmet laws significantly reduce the strain on public resources. Unhelmeted riders cost more to treat at the hospital, spend a longer time in rehabilitation, and are more likely to require some form of public assistance to for pay medical bills and rehabilitation. In 1991, prior to enacting its helmet law, California's state medical insurance program paid $40 million for the treatment of motorcycle-related head injuries. That figure dropped to $24 million after enactment of a universal helmet law.

It costs nothing to ride without a helmet as long as there is no crash. It is true that wearing a motorcycle helmet will not prevent a crash. But when a crash happens, the freedom to ride unhelmeted is paid for in different ways, by different sources. The motorcyclist pays and the public pays through taxes, insurance rates, and health care costs.

What is the price? Hospitalization and related medical expenses are higher for unhelmeted riders because of brain injuries. Here's what the data tell us:

• The average charge for inpatient care for motorcyclists who sustain a brain injury is more than twice the charge for motorcyclists receiving inpatient care for other injuries.

• The average savings for prevented brain injuries in Hawaii, Maine, Missouri, New York, Pennsylvania, Utah, and Wisconsin was $15,000 in inpatient costs for each incident in the first year.

• The average hospitalization costs for unhelmeted riders were one-third greater than those of helmeted riders ($7,208 to $5,852) in a study of Illinois-injured motorcyclists.

So who does pay the price? A large number of studies have focused on this issue and, although the percentages vary, one central point remains clear: whether as taxpayers or insurance customers or medical consumers, we all pay. For example,

• A privately conducted California study put the average cost of hospital admissions for a non-helmeted rider at $17,704. Of this initial amount, 72 percent of the costs for hospitalization were paid by the State of California, with another 10 percent being paid by other tax-based sources.

• Another study found that 57 percent of the patients listed a government program as the principal payer of in-patient hospital costs resulting from motorcycle crashes.

We may not be able to eliminate all the risk from motorcycling, but helmet laws greatly reduce the most expensive injuries head injuries. Reducing these costs is good for the consumer and it is good for business, too.
Tim Hoyt, Vice President, Safety
Nationwide Insurance Enterprises.

In the state of Texas you must purchase sufficient insurance and you receive a tag to put on your license plate proving you have it in order to ride without a helmet.
So that blows your theory out of the water.Unless of course your state isn't smart enough to implement such laws.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

Kids are stupid

Doesn't make a difference if they are riding around the block or on the interstate. They still don't pay attention

True kids can be stupid. But during all those years of cycling I never new a single person who received more then a knot on their noggin. And I spent most of my time hanging out with cyclist.
If it were my kid? Yes he or she would wear a helmet. But I dont need the gov to tell me that.
For the same reason I dont need the gov to tell me to wear a seatbelt.

When I started driving at 16, people would be insulted if you got in their car an put your seatbelt on......What's the matter? Don't trust my driving?

Several kids I knew were killed in car accidents when I was in HS. My kids did not have anyone in their class killed. Seat belts save lives and mandatory compliance played a huge part

meh...if your stupid enough to ride around without a seatbelt.
I do agree with the no texting while driving.

 

[rightwinger]

True kids can be stupid. But during all those years of cycling I never new a single person who received more then a knot on their noggin. And I spent most of my time hanging out with cyclist.
If it were my kid? Yes he or she would wear a helmet. But I dont need the gov to tell me that.
For the same reason I dont need the gov to tell me to wear a seatbelt.

When I started driving at 16, people would be insulted if you got in their car an put your seatbelt on......What's the matter? Don't trust my driving?

Several kids I knew were killed in car accidents when I was in HS. My kids did not have anyone in their class killed. Seat belts save lives and mandatory compliance played a huge part

meh...if your stupid enough to ride around without a seatbelt.
I do agree with the no texting while driving.

You want to drive on our roads? You follow our rules

Put your seatbelt on

 

[ArmyCowboy]

Like I said. It's a good idea to wear one. But I dont believe it's the govs place to mandate such things.
I raced bicycles both on the street and dirt. And yes I wore a helmet while doing so.
Riding around the neighborhood? No. Thats akin to wearing a helmet to go for a stroll.

Kids are stupid

Doesn't make a difference if they are riding around the block or on the interstate. They still don't pay attention

True kids can be stupid. But during all those years of cycling I never new a single person who received more then a knot on their noggin. And I spent most of my time hanging out with cyclist.
If it were my kid? Yes he or she would wear a helmet. But I dont need the gov to tell me that.
For the same reason I dont need the gov to tell me to wear a seatbelt.

You're confusing personal experience with data.

 

[Jarlaxle]

Unless you are walking, trip, and manage to fall on your head, bicycle helmets do not prevent head injuries, what's your point?

Unfortunately it is too late for a helmet to help for you. The damage is done, and irreversible.

It makes ZERO sense to be against kids wearing a helmet when riding their bike or skateboard. But sense is something you totally lack.

I never said I was against it. I am against the government mandating it, there is a difference.

Exactly. I will not drive a car without a seat belt, but it should not be required. I would never ride a motorcycle without a helmet...but it should not be required.

I'm fine with a motorcyclist with no helmet being left to bleed out if he cannot pay for his own care.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

I can understand where you're coming from. But there is always a cost to society that the 'individual rights' guy never thinks about.

People without health insurance is a prime example. Everyone's insurance premium is at least $1,000 per year more because of it.

The effect of liberty to individuals is that they may do what they please: we ought to see what it will please them to do, before we risk congratulations.
Edmund Burke

There is a cost to society that the government mandate guy flat out ignores. Personally, I would rather pay the cost of individual liberty than the one of tyranny.

WOW...tyranny. You are truly a butt hurt type.

Tyranny, as in arbitrary use of power. When people with guns say you need to do something for no other reason than they think they are smarter than you are, that is tyranny.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Kids are stupid

Doesn't make a difference if they are riding around the block or on the interstate. They still don't pay attention

True kids can be stupid. But during all those years of cycling I never new a single person who received more then a knot on their noggin. And I spent most of my time hanging out with cyclist.
If it were my kid? Yes he or she would wear a helmet. But I dont need the gov to tell me that.
For the same reason I dont need the gov to tell me to wear a seatbelt.

Same with motorcycles I presume? You 'individual rights' guys are really socialists, just too obtuse to understand how and why.

Universal Motorcycle Helmet Laws Reduce Costs to Society

Helmet Laws Reduce Public Payout Helmet laws significantly reduce the strain on public resources. Unhelmeted riders cost more to treat at the hospital, spend a longer time in rehabilitation, and are more likely to require some form of public assistance to for pay medical bills and rehabilitation. In 1991, prior to enacting its helmet law, California's state medical insurance program paid $40 million for the treatment of motorcycle-related head injuries. That figure dropped to $24 million after enactment of a universal helmet law.

It costs nothing to ride without a helmet as long as there is no crash. It is true that wearing a motorcycle helmet will not prevent a crash. But when a crash happens, the freedom to ride unhelmeted is paid for in different ways, by different sources. The motorcyclist pays and the public pays through taxes, insurance rates, and health care costs.

What is the price? Hospitalization and related medical expenses are higher for unhelmeted riders because of brain injuries. Here's what the data tell us:

• The average charge for inpatient care for motorcyclists who sustain a brain injury is more than twice the charge for motorcyclists receiving inpatient care for other injuries.

• The average savings for prevented brain injuries in Hawaii, Maine, Missouri, New York, Pennsylvania, Utah, and Wisconsin was $15,000 in inpatient costs for each incident in the first year.

• The average hospitalization costs for unhelmeted riders were one-third greater than those of helmeted riders ($7,208 to $5,852) in a study of Illinois-injured motorcyclists.

So who does pay the price? A large number of studies have focused on this issue and, although the percentages vary, one central point remains clear: whether as taxpayers or insurance customers or medical consumers, we all pay. For example,

• A privately conducted California study put the average cost of hospital admissions for a non-helmeted rider at $17,704. Of this initial amount, 72 percent of the costs for hospitalization were paid by the State of California, with another 10 percent being paid by other tax-based sources.

• Another study found that 57 percent of the patients listed a government program as the principal payer of in-patient hospital costs resulting from motorcycle crashes.

We may not be able to eliminate all the risk from motorcycling, but helmet laws greatly reduce the most expensive injuries head injuries. Reducing these costs is good for the consumer and it is good for business, too.
Tim Hoyt, Vice President, Safety
Nationwide Insurance Enterprises.

Any argument based on the cost to society is an arbitrary use of power, and, by definition, tyranny.

 

[ArmyCowboy]

There is a cost to society that the government mandate guy flat out ignores. Personally, I would rather pay the cost of individual liberty than the one of tyranny.

WOW...tyranny. You are truly a butt hurt type.

Tyranny, as in arbitrary use of power. When people with guns say you need to do something for no other reason than they think they are smarter than you are, that is tyranny.

One important distinction you failed to recognize.

We elected these "people with guns" and, with the power of the ballot, can ensure that they do not get reelected.

Therefore your analogy fails as does your claim of tyranny.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

True kids can be stupid. But during all those years of cycling I never new a single person who received more then a knot on their noggin. And I spent most of my time hanging out with cyclist.
If it were my kid? Yes he or she would wear a helmet. But I dont need the gov to tell me that.
For the same reason I dont need the gov to tell me to wear a seatbelt.

Same with motorcycles I presume? You 'individual rights' guys are really socialists, just too obtuse to understand how and why.

Universal Motorcycle Helmet Laws Reduce Costs to Society

Helmet Laws Reduce Public Payout Helmet laws significantly reduce the strain on public resources. Unhelmeted riders cost more to treat at the hospital, spend a longer time in rehabilitation, and are more likely to require some form of public assistance to for pay medical bills and rehabilitation. In 1991, prior to enacting its helmet law, California's state medical insurance program paid $40 million for the treatment of motorcycle-related head injuries. That figure dropped to $24 million after enactment of a universal helmet law.

It costs nothing to ride without a helmet as long as there is no crash. It is true that wearing a motorcycle helmet will not prevent a crash. But when a crash happens, the freedom to ride unhelmeted is paid for in different ways, by different sources. The motorcyclist pays and the public pays through taxes, insurance rates, and health care costs.

What is the price? Hospitalization and related medical expenses are higher for unhelmeted riders because of brain injuries. Here's what the data tell us:

• The average charge for inpatient care for motorcyclists who sustain a brain injury is more than twice the charge for motorcyclists receiving inpatient care for other injuries.

• The average savings for prevented brain injuries in Hawaii, Maine, Missouri, New York, Pennsylvania, Utah, and Wisconsin was $15,000 in inpatient costs for each incident in the first year.

• The average hospitalization costs for unhelmeted riders were one-third greater than those of helmeted riders ($7,208 to $5,852) in a study of Illinois-injured motorcyclists.

So who does pay the price? A large number of studies have focused on this issue and, although the percentages vary, one central point remains clear: whether as taxpayers or insurance customers or medical consumers, we all pay. For example,

• A privately conducted California study put the average cost of hospital admissions for a non-helmeted rider at $17,704. Of this initial amount, 72 percent of the costs for hospitalization were paid by the State of California, with another 10 percent being paid by other tax-based sources.

• Another study found that 57 percent of the patients listed a government program as the principal payer of in-patient hospital costs resulting from motorcycle crashes.

We may not be able to eliminate all the risk from motorcycling, but helmet laws greatly reduce the most expensive injuries head injuries. Reducing these costs is good for the consumer and it is good for business, too.
Tim Hoyt, Vice President, Safety
Nationwide Insurance Enterprises.

In the state of Texas you must purchase sufficient insurance and you receive a tag to put on your license plate proving you have it in order to ride without a helmet.
So that blows your theory out of the water.Unless of course your state isn't smart enough to implement such laws.

I met a doctor once that said all motorcycle riders should make their own choices, and should be considered organ donors in case they have an accident. That would eliminate the cost to society argument altogether.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

When I started driving at 16, people would be insulted if you got in their car an put your seatbelt on......What's the matter? Don't trust my driving?

Several kids I knew were killed in car accidents when I was in HS. My kids did not have anyone in their class killed. Seat belts save lives and mandatory compliance played a huge part

meh...if your stupid enough to ride around without a seatbelt.
I do agree with the no texting while driving.

You want to drive on our roads? You follow our rules

Put your seatbelt on

If you want to drive on my roads, you follow my rules, demolition derby rules.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Kids are stupid

Doesn't make a difference if they are riding around the block or on the interstate. They still don't pay attention

True kids can be stupid. But during all those years of cycling I never new a single person who received more then a knot on their noggin. And I spent most of my time hanging out with cyclist.
If it were my kid? Yes he or she would wear a helmet. But I dont need the gov to tell me that.
For the same reason I dont need the gov to tell me to wear a seatbelt.

You're confusing personal experience with data.

And you are confusing sound bites with data.