SpecNeon74 wrote:My logic isn't flawed, you can't compare bike riding to driving in the way you propose. Sure cars and pedestrians have more TBIs because there are more of them. You can't compare how potentially dangerous an activity is by the raw injury numbers. By that measure, sky diving and bungee jumping are safe activities because the injury numbers are so low. Those numbers are low because so few people participate. I wear helmets in cars most days I'm at work, it doesn't feel silly to me at all. The reason we don't need to advocate helmet wearing in a cars is because air bags, crumple zones, ESP, ect work better. They protect against a wide array of injuries not just TBIs, they don't take any time put on, and the driver is less likely to forget to use them. If any of these were practical for bikes perhaps they'd be considered.
Seat belt in car = helmet on bike
Why? Because both are the most convenient and effective form of safety equipment for their perspective mode of transportation. Seat belts don't work on bikes. However, seat belts, air bags etc are effective in cars at preventing all forms of injury.
For the record, I've never told any adult on a trail they need to find helmet. I did make a polite suggestion to a couple of lid-less teens riding the wrong way at Lakeshore once.
I'm not talking about absolute (raw) numbers, I'm talking about relative numbers. Percentage-wise, statistics show you have a better chance (higher percentage) of getting a head injury (open or closed) from driving a car than you do from riding a bicycle regardless of the safety equipment used. So, seat belt/air bag/whatever in car doesn't = helmet on bike.
Do you believe that wearing a helmet while driving would not lower your chances of a head injury regardless of whether the car has other safety features and equipment? Sounds like it.