[PLUG-TALK] Bike helmets, science, and anger

Paul Heinlein heinlein at madboa.com
Wed Jan 27 18:02:14 UTC 2016


On Wed, 27 Jan 2016, Ronald Chmara wrote:

> I would quibble with the second point... I have seen people get hot 
> and bothered about "organ donors" of both bicycle, and motorcycle, 
> varieties, not wearing helmets, for example.
>
> I also see signs of social stigma about auto drivers not wearing 
> seatbelts, and skaters (roller, blade, and board) not wearing 
> gelmets and pads... I don't think it's limited to bicycles, perhaps 
> there might be a more general issue of "safety shaming"?

I have nothing against "safety shaming" when it's done based on good 
evidence (as opposed to gory anecdotes) and when it's done in such a 
way that doesn't unfairly delegitimize a subset of people.

In the case of automotive seatbelts, the evidence is pretty clear that 
in most cases they're effective in reducing injuries. There are a 
small number of corner cases where seatbelts are more harmful, but 
those aren't indicative of the general body of evidence. The 
population to which they apply is clear (occupants of private 
automobiles), so there's no subset-shaming.

In the case of skaters and their gear, however, you're spot on. 
Certainly I'd want to see skaters who are engaged in high-speed or 
dangerous riding wear protective gear.

But I wouldn't have the same concern for the kids skating to school or 
heading to a friend's house. Will there be bumps and bruises? Sure. 
Will there be corner cases where a slow-moving skater would benefit 
from protective gear? Probably. Is that a public-health issue that 
requires all-in socio-legal involvement? No.

-- 
Paul Heinlein
heinlein at madboa.com
45°38' N, 122°6' W


More information about the PLUG-talk mailing list