poetd wrote:Mike Sales wrote: It is a diversion and an alibi for the chief cause of the danger, of which you are well aware. And the evidence is that helmets do not work in reducing that danger.
Agreed on the first point.
But then questionable lab studies don't prove that my choice to wear one in case of falls (I'm under no illusionment that it would do anything for me in a head-on collision with a HGV for instance) increases that danger.
Unless there is zero protective effect in helmets there must be something which reduces their overall effectiveness to undetectable levels. My guess is Risk Homeostasis.
You might to like to read this from the BMJ by Ben Goldacre, Wellcome research fellow in epidemiology and David Spiegelhalter, Winton professor for the public understanding of risk.
In any case, the current uncertainty about any benefit from helmet wearing or promotion is unlikely to be substantially reduced by further research. Equally, we can be certain that helmets will continue to be debated, and at length. The enduring popularity of helmets as a proposed major intervention for increased road safety may therefore lie not with their direct benefits—which seem too modest to capture compared with other strategies—but more with the cultural, psychological, and political aspects of popular debate around risk.
"Too modest to capture!"