Maybe. Seems anecdotal, but even if I take your word for it, even if it's true, we are - or should be - free to live our lives with whatever risk we deem acceptable.
My dad bikes basically daily to maintain his health. Helmets have quite literally saved his life at least three times. You can tell because the helmet is destroyed after; his head, however, was fully intact.
Helmets save lives; it comes down to simple physics. An object in motion tends to stay in motion. You skull, and your brain in your skull, are no exception. If you're moving on a bike, and you hit something which arrests the bike (or something hits you, more likely), your body will likely stop moving/change direction of motion; your skull will not, and your brain will not. Your skull, then, will impact the first thing it hits at the original velocity you were moving.
Your skull might be tough, but most people wouldn't shrug off a 10 mph hit to the skull, let alone more (if you collide with something else moving). Even if it is okay, your brain won't be. It isn't stationary in your skull. If your skull hits the pavement at 10 mph, your brain is also moving 10 mph. When your skull stops moving abruptly, your brain keeps going until it bashes itself against your skull at that same 10 mph.
Ever drop a fruit from a multi-story building? Yeah. Your brain will suffer damage.
Enter helmets. Helmets for bikes are intentionally designed to collapse. They crumple in the same way and for the same reasons cars crumple; energy is absorbed in the process of crumpling them, taking that energy out of the fall. It's like a small pillow for your skull. That is why they're typically a mix of foam and plastic, and have holes; they're fundamentally padding for your head.
When my dad almost died the first time, it was because a busy intersection had him looking for cars when there was a groove in the road dead ahead; his wheel got stuck, and over the handlebars he went. Full front of the helmet was caved in, and he got pretty scratched up. Bruises all over; but as far as we're aware, no concussion, and no lasting injuries. If that helmet hadn't soaked up that ~1 inch of energy, his brain would have.
As a note; it is for this reason that if you get in a significant accident with a helmet; if it is at all damaged, it should be replaced. Once the structural integrity of the helmet is disturbed, it will no longer help you.
To conclude; it is not anecdotal; it's physics. That said, I 100% agree that individual safety should be up to the individual. That sad, everyone should wear helmets and take other safety measures (such as seat-belts; they provide the same kind of support, albeit in a very different way. Yes, some are defective, or designed poorly; in those instances, they can prove a greater danger, just like airbags can; that said, most of the time, both are very good safety measures)
I would much prefer it if airbags came standard and it was LEGAL for you to remove them. I don't mind many of the airbags in my WRX (and being modern Subies it has like 9 airbags in it), but I would REALLY like to safely disable and remove the one that's sitting at the driver's knees as I see that one going off and breaking my legs more than helping me in a collision because I'm just so much taller than the average Japanese dude - like I barely fit in the car with a helmet on doing motorsports stuff tall. For my own piece of mind I'd like to make that one go away, even though it'd probably make the car overall a bit less safe. I'm fine with that compromise.
I think that's probably a good idea; the problem with all of this comes down to the concept of "burden on society".
Death and injury of the individual does not exclusively cost the individual. Hell, it doesn't exclusively cost the family. If you die because your car doesn't have airbags and your head hits the dash or the windshield, and you suffer serious head trauma requiring paramedics show up and drag you down to the hospital for emergency or intensive care treatment, you're decision affects more than just you.
That's where most of the mandatory laws with regards to safety come from; by enforcing safety, you're protecting the taxpayer dollar.
Of course, in the present-day society, such a concern is laughable; the money wasted on someone getting put into a coma in a car crash isn't even a drop in the bucket compared to money the government just wastes; period.
The other thing is liability. If you removed ALL of the airbags in your car, and you pick someone else up, then get in a car crash... what then? If they died, are you guilty of manslaughter? Etc.
And all of that is before we factor in the addition of "Obamacare". Why do you think premium cost (for individuals that COULD pay) skyrocketed ten, twentyfold? When you agree to cover individuals regardless of pre-existing conditions, or their own vices (smoking, drugs, etc.), the costs of care and the risk of coverage increases exponentially.
Obamacare had a side-effect very few people consider; it defeated natural selection. When you have an idiot that decides it's a good idea to attempt to break a cinderblock with their head (happens way more often than you might think; head over to YouTube and search for it and you'll get instantly, like, 50 hits) and provide them FREE health coverage, what does that do? It incentivizes it. If, instead, they are paying for their healthcare, people are less likely to take risks that may cause them bodily harm. Simple as that.
It's a complicated issue. I wish it weren't; in an ideal society it would be fairly easy. That said, we don't live in an ideal society, we live in a dictatorship. Even under Trump, though, these problems were messy.
Sidenote; I agree on the knee airbags. IMO Toyota is probably the best brand for non-truck cars out there these days, but man their cars are tight.
Yeah, you're free to ride your bike around without one.... no one will stop you and force one on your head, just be prepared to be told over and over how easily preventable it was.
I bet you also bitch and moan about seat belts even though they totally make sense to use and you should probably just use them even without being told....
So are masks, but that doesn't stop me from not wearing them. I do wear a bike helmet though, because I like my brain and I have an inherent distrust that any machine is 100% reliable.
How is he bitching or moaning? He's just saying that we should be free to do what we want in respect to our bodies. And we should. I remember as a kid sitting in the back of a pickup truck without seats...let alone seatbelts...for long road trips. It was a different age.
Yeah, this is a dumb one. Every year there's thousands of parents who wish their kid had worn a helmet because they didn't and now that accident killed them.
All well and good riding around without one feeling superior until asphalt at 20 mph shows you who's actually superior.
Mandatory helmet laws result in a higher rate of injury and death to cyclists. They also dissuade people from riding and recouping the physical benefit of the exercise.
This is well studied and anecdotal reports of helmets 'saving lives' do not constitute scientific evidence. There's a lot of nuance.
Noone here is arguing that they should be legally mandated. That is a strawman.
The value of helmets is simple physics. An object in motion tends to stay in motion. An un-helmeted head hitting the pavement will absorb more energy than a helmeted. Because of this, helmets prevent head injuries; cracked skulls and brain damage.
Wearing them does not dissuade people from riding whatsoever; I have never even heard of someone saying "I don't feel like riding a bike because I'd have to wear a helmet"; that's absurd. If people aren't riding it's because they don't want to ride a bike, likely because they're lazy and don't prefer physical activity.
Until you can disprove the simplest of physics, don't try to peddle this bullshit. No scientist worth their salt would claim that helmets cause more injury and death directly; do not confuse causation with correlation. Just because 50 people died with helmets but only 25 died without, doesn't mean that helmets caused 25 more people to die. There are more factors to it than that.
It's not the helmet, it's being forced to wear it. Most would choose a helmet if left to their own devices. It's the being fucked with part that rankles people. The sheriff in my home town used to regularly hassle kids at the park if they were standing around where the bikes were parked. He'd make you prove you had a helmet or give you a ticket right there, even if he just didn't believe you walked that day. In retrospect dude was probably a pedo on the hunt.
Mandatory helmet laws result in a higher rate of injury and death to cyclists. They also dissuade people from riding and recouping the physical benefit of the exercise. This is well studied and anecdotal reports of helmets 'saving lives' do not constitute scientific evidence. There's a lot of nuance.
What is exactly wrong with helmets? Pick your battles. Helmets save tremendous amounts of lives.
Maybe. Seems anecdotal, but even if I take your word for it, even if it's true, we are - or should be - free to live our lives with whatever risk we deem acceptable.
My dad bikes basically daily to maintain his health. Helmets have quite literally saved his life at least three times. You can tell because the helmet is destroyed after; his head, however, was fully intact.
Helmets save lives; it comes down to simple physics. An object in motion tends to stay in motion. You skull, and your brain in your skull, are no exception. If you're moving on a bike, and you hit something which arrests the bike (or something hits you, more likely), your body will likely stop moving/change direction of motion; your skull will not, and your brain will not. Your skull, then, will impact the first thing it hits at the original velocity you were moving.
Your skull might be tough, but most people wouldn't shrug off a 10 mph hit to the skull, let alone more (if you collide with something else moving). Even if it is okay, your brain won't be. It isn't stationary in your skull. If your skull hits the pavement at 10 mph, your brain is also moving 10 mph. When your skull stops moving abruptly, your brain keeps going until it bashes itself against your skull at that same 10 mph.
Ever drop a fruit from a multi-story building? Yeah. Your brain will suffer damage.
Enter helmets. Helmets for bikes are intentionally designed to collapse. They crumple in the same way and for the same reasons cars crumple; energy is absorbed in the process of crumpling them, taking that energy out of the fall. It's like a small pillow for your skull. That is why they're typically a mix of foam and plastic, and have holes; they're fundamentally padding for your head.
When my dad almost died the first time, it was because a busy intersection had him looking for cars when there was a groove in the road dead ahead; his wheel got stuck, and over the handlebars he went. Full front of the helmet was caved in, and he got pretty scratched up. Bruises all over; but as far as we're aware, no concussion, and no lasting injuries. If that helmet hadn't soaked up that ~1 inch of energy, his brain would have.
As a note; it is for this reason that if you get in a significant accident with a helmet; if it is at all damaged, it should be replaced. Once the structural integrity of the helmet is disturbed, it will no longer help you.
To conclude; it is not anecdotal; it's physics. That said, I 100% agree that individual safety should be up to the individual. That sad, everyone should wear helmets and take other safety measures (such as seat-belts; they provide the same kind of support, albeit in a very different way. Yes, some are defective, or designed poorly; in those instances, they can prove a greater danger, just like airbags can; that said, most of the time, both are very good safety measures)
I would much prefer it if airbags came standard and it was LEGAL for you to remove them. I don't mind many of the airbags in my WRX (and being modern Subies it has like 9 airbags in it), but I would REALLY like to safely disable and remove the one that's sitting at the driver's knees as I see that one going off and breaking my legs more than helping me in a collision because I'm just so much taller than the average Japanese dude - like I barely fit in the car with a helmet on doing motorsports stuff tall. For my own piece of mind I'd like to make that one go away, even though it'd probably make the car overall a bit less safe. I'm fine with that compromise.
I think that's probably a good idea; the problem with all of this comes down to the concept of "burden on society".
Death and injury of the individual does not exclusively cost the individual. Hell, it doesn't exclusively cost the family. If you die because your car doesn't have airbags and your head hits the dash or the windshield, and you suffer serious head trauma requiring paramedics show up and drag you down to the hospital for emergency or intensive care treatment, you're decision affects more than just you.
That's where most of the mandatory laws with regards to safety come from; by enforcing safety, you're protecting the taxpayer dollar.
Of course, in the present-day society, such a concern is laughable; the money wasted on someone getting put into a coma in a car crash isn't even a drop in the bucket compared to money the government just wastes; period.
The other thing is liability. If you removed ALL of the airbags in your car, and you pick someone else up, then get in a car crash... what then? If they died, are you guilty of manslaughter? Etc.
And all of that is before we factor in the addition of "Obamacare". Why do you think premium cost (for individuals that COULD pay) skyrocketed ten, twentyfold? When you agree to cover individuals regardless of pre-existing conditions, or their own vices (smoking, drugs, etc.), the costs of care and the risk of coverage increases exponentially.
Obamacare had a side-effect very few people consider; it defeated natural selection. When you have an idiot that decides it's a good idea to attempt to break a cinderblock with their head (happens way more often than you might think; head over to YouTube and search for it and you'll get instantly, like, 50 hits) and provide them FREE health coverage, what does that do? It incentivizes it. If, instead, they are paying for their healthcare, people are less likely to take risks that may cause them bodily harm. Simple as that.
It's a complicated issue. I wish it weren't; in an ideal society it would be fairly easy. That said, we don't live in an ideal society, we live in a dictatorship. Even under Trump, though, these problems were messy.
Sidenote; I agree on the knee airbags. IMO Toyota is probably the best brand for non-truck cars out there these days, but man their cars are tight.
Yeah, you're free to ride your bike around without one.... no one will stop you and force one on your head, just be prepared to be told over and over how easily preventable it was.
I bet you also bitch and moan about seat belts even though they totally make sense to use and you should probably just use them even without being told....
Helmets are mandated in many States.
The nanny State.
Weird. Didn't know that was a thing, and I live in a blue state. Looking at the list, looks like most red states mandate them.
So are masks, but that doesn't stop me from not wearing them. I do wear a bike helmet though, because I like my brain and I have an inherent distrust that any machine is 100% reliable.
How is he bitching or moaning? He's just saying that we should be free to do what we want in respect to our bodies. And we should. I remember as a kid sitting in the back of a pickup truck without seats...let alone seatbelts...for long road trips. It was a different age.
Yeah, this is a dumb one. Every year there's thousands of parents who wish their kid had worn a helmet because they didn't and now that accident killed them.
All well and good riding around without one feeling superior until asphalt at 20 mph shows you who's actually superior.
^ People don't seem to realize that it isn't you vs the asphalt; it's brain vs asphalt. Brain is soft, asphalt is hard. End of story.
Mandatory helmet laws result in a higher rate of injury and death to cyclists. They also dissuade people from riding and recouping the physical benefit of the exercise. This is well studied and anecdotal reports of helmets 'saving lives' do not constitute scientific evidence. There's a lot of nuance.
Provide these studies.
Noone here is arguing that they should be legally mandated. That is a strawman.
The value of helmets is simple physics. An object in motion tends to stay in motion. An un-helmeted head hitting the pavement will absorb more energy than a helmeted. Because of this, helmets prevent head injuries; cracked skulls and brain damage.
Wearing them does not dissuade people from riding whatsoever; I have never even heard of someone saying "I don't feel like riding a bike because I'd have to wear a helmet"; that's absurd. If people aren't riding it's because they don't want to ride a bike, likely because they're lazy and don't prefer physical activity.
Until you can disprove the simplest of physics, don't try to peddle this bullshit. No scientist worth their salt would claim that helmets cause more injury and death directly; do not confuse causation with correlation. Just because 50 people died with helmets but only 25 died without, doesn't mean that helmets caused 25 more people to die. There are more factors to it than that.
A helmet has saved my bacon multiple times!
So... you have links for that?
It's not the helmet, it's being forced to wear it. Most would choose a helmet if left to their own devices. It's the being fucked with part that rankles people. The sheriff in my home town used to regularly hassle kids at the park if they were standing around where the bikes were parked. He'd make you prove you had a helmet or give you a ticket right there, even if he just didn't believe you walked that day. In retrospect dude was probably a pedo on the hunt.
Mandatory helmet laws result in a higher rate of injury and death to cyclists. They also dissuade people from riding and recouping the physical benefit of the exercise. This is well studied and anecdotal reports of helmets 'saving lives' do not constitute scientific evidence. There's a lot of nuance.