4 ms·

> A three-fold increase was found in the rate of organ donation for unhelmeted motorcyclists compared to helmeted motorcyclists (p = 0.006). First the statisti

by RhysU 1y ago

> A three-fold increase was found in the rate of organ donation for unhelmeted motorcyclists compared to helmeted motorcyclists (p = 0.006). First the statistics but then the following op-ed...? > From a public health perspective, helmets should be required for all motorcyclists... Personally, I always wear and will always wear a helmet. Legally, however, requiring them is pure nanny state. Consider: We would certainly save more lives by requiring all vehicle drivers to wear helmets, including cars/trucks/etc in addition to motorcycles. Like, wear a helmet inside your car. Professionals do. But we amateurs do not. I would be laughed for proposing a universal helmet law. So, clearly saving lives isn't the only valued metric

redhale 1y ago
I think seatbelts or airbags are better analogies. And both seatbelts and airbags are mandated in the US. Of course saving lives isn't the ONLY metric (perhaps all personal vehicles would be banned if that were the case), but we make reasonable compromises all over the place in the direction of saving lives. I think the discussion is just over what people generally see as "reasonable". And public opinion can change drastically over time [0], due in part to the popularization of studies like this. [0] https://www.wpr.org/history/surprisingly-controversial-history-seat-belts https://www.wpr.org/history/surprisingly-controversial-histo...
- RhysU 1y ago
  I don't understand why you think a seatbelt or an airbag is a better analogy to a helmet than a helmet. Helmets are perfect analogies to helmets. Motorcycle airbags exist, add safety, and are perfect analogies to car airbags. Motorcycle seatbelts are possible, are a net loss to safety (because you're strapped to the outside of a giant mass then crushed), and are perfect analogies to car seatbelts. My point stands: All drivers in all vehicles are safer when wearing a helmet. Yet, for motorized vehicles we only legally impose helmets on motorcycles. It's seen as ludicrous to suggest we mandate helmets for the others though it'd save lives, cut societal costs, etc. It's seen as so ludicrous that people immediately redirect the topic. Like I made a category error or inference mistake in suggesting it.

by RhysU 1y ago

redhale 1y ago

I think seatbelts or airbags are better analogies. And both seatbelts and airbags are mandated in the US. Of course saving lives isn't the ONLY metric (perhaps all personal vehicles would be banned if that were the case), but we make reasonable compromises all over the place in the direction of saving lives. I think the discussion is just over what people generally see as "reasonable". And public opinion can change drastically over time [0], due in part to the popularization of studies like this. [0] https://www.wpr.org/history/surprisingly-controversial-history-seat-belts https://www.wpr.org/history/surprisingly-controversial-histo...

RhysU 1y ago
I don't understand why you think a seatbelt or an airbag is a better analogy to a helmet than a helmet. Helmets are perfect analogies to helmets. Motorcycle airbags exist, add safety, and are perfect analogies to car airbags. Motorcycle seatbelts are possible, are a net loss to safety (because you're strapped to the outside of a giant mass then crushed), and are perfect analogies to car seatbelts. My point stands: All drivers in all vehicles are safer when wearing a helmet. Yet, for motorized vehicles we only legally impose helmets on motorcycles. It's seen as ludicrous to suggest we mandate helmets for the others though it'd save lives, cut societal costs, etc. It's seen as so ludicrous that people immediately redirect the topic. Like I made a category error or inference mistake in suggesting it.