mikeymo wrote:I agree. I wonder why so many people are using the tragic death of a small child to push their agenda.
It seems that "evidence" and "rationality" aren't really that valued after all.
That's the question we ask every time a kid breaks their arm and the press declare that had he been wearing a helmet it would all have been fine.
Or a kid gets killed by a person using a car, and obviously their chest injuries wouldn't have happened if they had a magic hat on.
The evidence absolutely does *not* support an intervention for cranial safety when cycling... Because the intervention is a positive action then that is the side which should have the evidence.
Here we have a clear example where the obsession with "You must wear your magic hat out to play" has caused a death (and it's not an isolated incident).
We know that cycle helmets cause death (because of them being over-worn), and we know that despite our best efforts we can't find a benefit on a population level.
We also know that the mere promotion acts as a not insignificant barrier to people cycling - i.e. it has a net negative effect on health.
If you follow the evidence base then there is no suggestion that magic hats are useful. If you feel that you (or your dependents) are at a significant risk of a single vehicle collision which would result in a cranial collision then fine - but I the vast majority of people don't think that far.