Think I'll write to my State Rep & the Editor...

[SliderPhoto]

That's a great story Rick.

I've seen some mangled helmets. I bet a bunch of people still have them around as reminders and could tell their stories. I think it would make for some interesting reading!

[Super Dave]

I had a neighbor who worked in the emergency room. He said he's seen more deaths from riders wearing helmets than those who didn't. He claimed that there is swelling in the brain on a helmet injury, where the cracking of the skull (with no helmet) relieves this pressure.

Ok, am I the only one that thinks this is BS?

Hasn't anyone been on the ground?

I've been racing since 1987.  Not like a few races each year, but lots of races.

Thousands and thousands of racing miles.  Big events.  High speeds.  

In that time, I've been to six events that someone died at.  It's terrible each time it happens, but it's not a very big number considering the "high speeds" and the "risk".

I quit counting how many times I fell down after twenty-one...that's another story about the number...

Anyway, seems as though the death is caused by the accident, not the helmet.  If grandma turns left in front of you and plows your head into the pavement...

Having had my head ran over in 1991 at Brainerd, I didn't have any brain swelling or anything because I was wearing a helmet.  If I didn't have a helmet on, I would have been dead.

[Lowe119]

Ok, am I the only one that thinks this is BS?

I agree, but it is sad that a "Health Care Professional" believes this. It is people like this that make the State Representatives question the importance of a helmet. (although that MAY be good if we don't want more laws restricting our freedoms)

[StumpysWife]

According to the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety:

Because serious head injury is common among fatally injured motorcyclists, helmet use is important. In states that require all riders to wear helmets, use approaches 100 percent compared with about 50 percent in other states.3 Yet only 19 states and the District of Columbia mandate helmet use by all riders. Death rates from head injuries have been shown to be twice as high among motorcyclists in states with no helmet laws or laws that apply only to young riders, compared with states where laws apply to all riders.4 In the last few years several states have repealed or weakened their helmet laws. In 1997, helmet laws in Texas and Arkansas were weakened to apply only to younger riders. Kentucky weakened its law in 1998, Louisiana weakened its law in 1999, Florida weakened its law in 2000, and Pennsylvania weakened its law in 2003. Repealing or weakening helmet laws so they don't apply to all riders has been followed by increases in deaths.5,6,7,8 In contrast, benefits return when helmet laws applying to all riders are reinstated.9,10

Helmets are about 29 percent effective in preventing motorcycle deaths and about 67 percent effective in preventing brain injuries. An unhelmeted rider is 40 percent more likely to suffer a fatal head injury, compared with a helmeted rider.

There's the facts. Helmets are safe.

Also I read in another study last week, that the rate of helmet use in states where there is a helmet law, helmet use is about 100% so I don't think the government is making money off tickets.  It's kind of hard to get away with not wearing a helmet, unlike a seatbelt.

Adamini slipped up when he used the "helmets are just as safe as your bare skull" argument.  Perhaps more education is needed for emergency workers removing helmets.  Is that where the problem is?

Heather

[StumpysWife]

OK here's my letter and I'll feel better now... ;).

Sometimes you just have to voice your opinion....

I'm very disappointed in your comments in the article entitled "Little chance motorcycle helmet law will be changed"  appearing in the December 8, 2004 edition of The Mining Journal.

Perhaps your argument is that whether an individual wears a helmet should be their personal choice.  However, it is highly irresponsible of you to use the safety of helmets as the basis for your argument.  You ask for facts.  I'll provide a couple.

You say, "It appears that if a person is operating a motorcycle at speeds of more than 20 miles per hour that wearing a helmet has no effect on injuries or the lack thereof," Adamini said. "Face it, most people driving a motorcycle do so at high speeds. If you're going 80 miles per hour, you're going to be hurt whether or not you're wearing a helmet."  

First of all, the characterization that all motorcycles travel at high speeds is ludicrous and unfounded.  That is just silly.  Second, when wearing proper riding gear, chances are good you will not be hurt if you fall at that speed.  How do I know?  My husband falls off his motorcycle several times a year—he's a road racer.  80 miles per hour is slow in that sport.  He scraped his elbow once because his leather suit was wearing out.  That's about it.  Is he wearing more than you should wear on the street?  Rather than a jacket and pants, he wears a one-piece suit.  Other than that, he wears good gloves, boots and a helmet—proper riding gear.  

You say, "Show me the data that proves wearing a helmet will make a difference in high-speed motorcycle crashes and I'll support the current law."  I'll be happy to assist you.  According to a report by Insurance Institute for Highway Safety I found doing a simple search on the web search engine "Google",
"Because serious head injury is common among fatally injured motorcyclists, helmet use is important. In states that require all riders to wear helmets, use approaches 100 percent compared with about 50 percent in other states. Yet only 19 states and the District of Columbia mandate helmet use by all riders. Death rates from head injuries have been shown to be twice as high among motorcyclists in states with no helmet laws or laws that apply only to young riders, compared with states where laws apply to all riders. In the last few years several states have repealed or weakened their helmet laws. In 1997, helmet laws in Texas and Arkansas were weakened to apply only to younger riders. Kentucky weakened its law in 1998, Louisiana weakened its law in 1999, Florida weakened its law in 2000, and Pennsylvania weakened its law in 2003. Repealing or weakening helmet laws so they don't apply to all riders has been followed by increases in deaths. In contrast, benefits return when helmet laws applying to all riders are reinstated.
Helmets are about 29 percent effective in preventing motorcycle deaths and about 67 percent effective in preventing brain injuries. An unhelmeted rider is 40 percent more likely to suffer a fatal head injury, compared with a helmeted rider."
This report and their sources can be viewed online at www.iihs.org/safety_facts/fatality_facts/motorcyl.htm.

Helmets are safe. Let's encourage everyone to wear them whether it is the law or not.  Do not use helmets in your "choice" argument.  Argue your right to choose in a responsible manner, not one based on stereotypes and ego.  

I hope this presentation of facts rather than opinion is helpful to you.  Thank you.

Respectfully,



Heather Steltenpohl
 

[251am]

Way to go, great letter. I support helmet laws only because I'd really like to see the Harley bada@@ boys wearing them. Otherwise, I really don't care if someone else chooses a helmet or not. I choose to wear one and so does my wife. Here's the angle that I'm wondering about; What is the correlation bettween the state's helmet laws and the insurance rates? i.e. Are the insurance rates lower in states that have mandatory helmet laws?
  The Wisconsin DOT tabulates deaths on bikes every year and publishes results. The overwhelming majority of deaths involve Harleys, alcohol, and a lack of headgear. If the majority of deaths on bikes in Wisconsin are on Harleys why aren't Harley riders paying $1500 a year to insure their bikes?
   So, why won't my Farmer's agent provide insurance for our RC 51, but his parent company Foremost will, for $1400 annual? I don't mean to threadjack. I believe there is a correlation between the money insurance lobbyists throw around our state capitals and the legislation, or lack thereof, we eventually see. This comes up a couple times a year in our Madison BMW Motorcycle Club and makes me just as sick.
  Adamini's moronic comments only add fuel to my suspicions; Our representatives and legislators are becoming more emboldened as the amount of monies they have been bribed with starts to pile up. Take a general consensus please; How many here have insurance company "headquarters" in the same city as their state capitals?