Some figures from 1 Emergency Room, (OH)

[PeteSC]

This is an Op-ed piece from Cincinatti, written by 2 ER docs...


Wednesday, June 8, 2005
Freedom to ride helmetless costs us all

 
The very act of riding a motorcycle, unenclosed and bathed in the elements, is an expression of independence and freedom. Thus it is no surprise that many area bikers zealously guard their "right" to ride without a helmet.

Mandatory helmet laws, many bikers argue, smack of government intrusion and are an insult to a biker's ability to decide what is good for his or her own safety. But their arguments have a fatal flaw: Their freedom to ride unhelmeted comes with a price that all of us pay.

It is true that motorcyclists themselves often pay the ultimate price. Helmets, like seat belts, save lives. When Kentucky repealed its mandatory helmet law in 1998, its annual mortality rate per 10,000 riders leaped 55 percent. After Louisiana repealed its law in 1999, the annual death rate increased so precipitously - 83.5 percent - that the law was reinstated in 2004.

Unhelmeted motorcyclists who survive accidents often face severe lifelong disabilities - the antithesis of the freedom they treasure.

But dead and injured motorcyclists are not the only ones who pay. Unhelmeted bikers who are injured are far more costly to care for and can drain thousands from Medicaid, Medicare and indigent-care levy funds. Nationally, about half of motorcyclists involved in crashes do not have private medical insurance.

We recently reviewed the experiences of patients who were brought to University Hospital's Level I Trauma Center after motorcycle accidents in 2004. Among our results:

40 wore helmets, 70 were unhelmeted, and in 10 patients it was unclear whether a helmet was worn.

Head injury occurred in 47 percent of unhelmeted riders, compared with 8 percent of helmeted riders. Of unhelmeted riders with head injuries, 30 percent went home; 50 percent went to a rehabilitation facility or nursing home; and 21 percent died. All helmeted riders with head injuries went home.

The average hospital cost for an unhelmeted rider was $67,700, compared with $23,700 for a helmeted rider. Medicare, Medicaid or indigent care levy funds covered these costs in 33 percent of unhelmeted riders, whereas all helmeted riders had private insurance.

Helmets not only save the lives and brains of motorcyclists, they also save taxpayer dollars. At the very least, all unhelmeted riders should be required to carry proof of private health insurance along with their driver's license. They would then be paying part of the cost of "freedom."
 
Dr.Raj Narayan is chairman of the Department of Neurosurgery at the UC College of Medicine. Dr. Lori Shutter is a neuro-intensivist with the Mayfield Clinic and the Neuroscience Institute at University Hospital.

[chevsuz12]

AAARRRGGGGHHHH!

I am sick and tired of hearing everyone whine, bitch, and moan about motorcyclists, helmets and the high cost of insurance.  

One could easily make the argument that if motorcycles where banned altogether then insurance would be cheaper as well.

And what about bicycling, shouldn't you wear your helmet there?  Hell, I would be willing to bet that more people die every year in auto accidents from head trauma than on motorcycles.  But we don't make the drivers of cages wear helmets!  

What about people speeding in those cars, lets put electronic restrictions on all cars to automatically control their speed.  

Lets all partake in only government and insurance company approved activities.  

Isn't the real reason that the cost of insurance and healthcare going up is because of all of the fraudulent claims, illegal aliens abusing the use of emergency rooms, malpractice suits, drug abusers, etc.

"But their arguments have a fatal flaw: Their freedom to ride unhelmeted comes with a price that all of us pay."  What a bullshiit statement!  I bet the doctor that wrote this article probably enjoys some dangerous activity, does he drive a sports car, does he drive it a little too fast? Is it a convertible?  I am sure convertibles are pretty dangerous as well.......Maybe he rides horses, that sure is a long fall from them, might cause head trauma, better require him to have extra insurance.

Folks, if we keep this attitude up soon anything you do that could possibly be considered unsafe will be banned!

[PeteSC]

Yes, by that standard alone, people who don't have health insurance should be under house arrest.....

  The health care system/insurance is a mess.   Rather than fix it, they'll point out convenient scape goats as a source of thier problems.
  Helmetless riders, and riders in general, are usually likely targets.

    I don't push 'helmet laws', I just promote wearing the damn things.
  They  do reduce injuries in accidents, they don't eliminate them.
 

       For me,it was interesting to see a 'defined' cost difference between riders who wore helmets, and didn't, at ONE emergency room.

       We are participating in a 'insurance approved' activity.   They'll keep issuing motorcycle insurance, as long as they can make money on the policies.  They're in business.
   We've had members on this board post messages about 'my insurance carrier isn't going to  write my bike model anymore'.
    They sure as heck have a way to identify models of bikes they pay too many claims on, whey can't they figure out ways to allow riders who always wear a helmet get a discount, and riders who don't want to wear one...pay more?

     It's the same situation that we have with the 'squidly boyz' and cruisers with loud pipes bringing law enforcement attention, or legislation, on all riders.
   To the non riding public, motorcycles, are motorcycles....

  Oh yeah, locally they're talking about legislation for ATVs.  Too many kids are getting hurt/killed on them.
  The local news has been featuring a mother of a 13 year old boy who died on one a few years ago.  She bought the damn thing for the kid, and let him ride it unsupervised!

[Red01]

And what about bicycling, shouldn't you wear your helmet there?

Some places do require bicyclists to wear helmets... for instance, Washington state's King County (the county Seattle is in) requires them.

[chippi]

And what about bicycling, shouldn't you wear your helmet there?

New York state law bicycle riders under 14 must wear a helmet

[Bazza]

I have heard the argument before about not wearing a helmet because "I will only hurt myself".

Well I have this friend who received a brain injury while he was a kid, and let me tell you his parents, then later his wife & children have had to suffer daily (and still do) because of his actions (outbursts of rage etc) that are due to his brain injury. I can tell you 1st hand that my friend does not live a happy life becuase of that unfortunate incident when he was a kid. He is basically a very good individual who has no control over his temper. He has also pretty much experianced every sort of anti depresent on the market by doctors trying to control his imbalances.

So the next time you decide to ride without a helmet, try to picture members of your family spoon feeding you blended carrots for the next 20 years, because you somehow survived the crash (and it may have only been minor).

I would agree that a helmet is no guarentee that you will survice an accident unscathed, but it has been proven to improve your odds. Like any dangerous sport, you should always wear the proper gear.

I have yet to see any bike races on late night TV with helmetless riders. Ever wonder why?

[Bazza]

Motorcycle Accident Statistics

According to a 2001 report on motorcycle accident statistics from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), more than 38,000 motorcyclists died in single vehicle motorcycle crashes between 1975 and 1999. This statistic accounts for 45 percent of all fatal motorcycle crashes during this time period. There was a historic low of 937 fatalities in 1996 and 1997, followed by a 21.7 percent increase in motorcyclist fatalities from 1997 to 1999.
In the decade between 1990 and 1999, there were 11,038 deaths due to single vehicle motorcycle accidents. During the same time period, statistics show that there were roughly 294,000 non-fatal single vehicle motorcycle crashes. Of these, approximately 39,000 involved only property damage, while 255,000 involved injury to the motorcyclist.
Analysts of these statistics say that several factors contribute to the high number of deaths by motorcycle accidents. In more than 50 percent of all fatal motorcycle accidents, the driver was not wearing a helmet. (In Colorado, Illinois and Iowa, there are no law requiring motorcyclists to wear helmets; in a number of other states, helmets are only required for riders under age 20, 18, 17 or 14 in Maine.) Nearly one-third of fatally injured motorcyclists did not have proper licensing to operate the motorcycle at the time of their death.
Many fatal motorcycle accidents occur on rural or undivided roadways. Statistics also show that almost two-thirds of fatal motorcycle accidents are associated with speeding; almost 60 percent of fatal motorcycle accidents happen at night; and high blood alcohol concentration levels are also a major factor in many fatal motorcycle accidents. Almost 25 percent of all motorcycle accident fatalities occur as a result of braking or steering maneuvers, and half involve negotiating a curve prior to the accident. Accidents that involve faulty mechanisms may be the fault of the motorcycle manufacturer and not the driver.
According to the NHTSA report, a motorcyclist is approximately 16 times more likely to die in an accident than an automobile occupant; additionally, he is three times more likely to be injured in a crash.
Head injury is the leading cause of death in motorcycle accidents, proving the importance of helmet use for all motorcyclists. The NHTSA estimates that motorcycle helmets reduce the likelihood of death in a motorcycle accident by 29 percent.

[Sven]

My views are that helmets are a reasonable precaution, and I not only am required to wear one, but I choose to wear it.  However, they are only as effective as a seatbelt.  People wearing helmets, and wearing seatbelts, suffer extreme injury/death, regardless of these precautions.

I am on the fence about whether laws should exist about the use of these items.  With child seats, laws are protecting children who cannot take independant reasonable precaution. With seatbelt/helmet laws, law is protecting...the insurance companies, the families of people who would otherwise be killed in accidents, and the economic liability of drivers of other vehicles (assuming some accidents would have been much worse without the helmets/seatbelts).

But I'm not sure we need those laws.  (My politics are:  Federal rights rather than state rights, and protect me from other people, not from my own stupid decisions.)  I wear a helmet out of choice, even on occasions when it's legal I don't.  Occassionally, at low speeds (in a park, in a parking lot, etc.) I may not wear one, also it does make it easier to hear the bike to listen for odd sounds.  Yes, I know this is a risk, in that people trip and fall and bash their brains out at 0 MPH every day, but, DAMN, life is nothing but a risk, with the same end for everyone, regardless of how precautious one lives.

After some thought, I very recently chose to join our state's ABATE group.  While I am not interesting in repealing helmet laws, nor am I against doing so, this group has helped pass other laws to make riders safer, and if aggressively push right-of-way violation enforcement.

[chevsuz12]

Sven, are you an American?  "My politics are:  Federal rights rather than state rights, and protect me from other people, not from my own stupid decisions".

If you are not an american citizen, then I can understand this statement.  But if you are, then I really can't fathom how one could think this way!  

America was designed from the beginning with minimal federal control and that the states should have the freedom to create laws.  The role of the federal government is not to protect you from hurting yourself, (That is the role of the state) but it is to protect you from the influx of foreign powers, such as terrorist, or military attacks.   Maybe if our federal lawmakers would stop worrying so damn much about protecting us from hurting ourselves, situations like 911 would have never occurred!

Go read your constitution, and especially the Federalist Papers.

[Sven]

I didn't add that particular statement to open a discussion on states' rights vs. federal rights, and I am not going to debate that in this forum.

I was just trying to explain why I am on the fence with regard to helmet laws and other laws that are designed to protect people from their own (sometimes foolish) choices.

[PeteSC]

Abate does a few good things, but the damage they do in perpetuating the helmet myths kind of wipes it out............

  It's kind of like using Rodney King as a 'poster boy' for correcting police violence.

[Sven]

That's why I have never supported ABATE before...in most states, they seem to have no legislative agenda other than repealing helmet laws, an issue that I am either against, or at least rather ambivalent about.  It was only after looking at what else they are doing here that I decided to join for a year and see how it goes.

I think the worst damage they do is in publicizing how many people are severely injured/die EVEN THOUGH they were wearing helmets...as if helmets offer no substantial protection.  Why not find a way to encourage people to wear helmets, even while you are asking the government to let riders make their own decisions.  "While we think you should always wear a helmet, we believe you should have the right to choose."

Maybe they feel people can't handle moderation and ambivalence...

[PeteSC]

How about 'make an informed, responsible choice', and no whining, afterward?
   Too many people parrot the 'freedom' crap, and leave it at that.........

  The gene pool needs filtration....but it shouldn't cost the rest of us.

[billster]

Back in the seventies (I sound more and more like me grandpappy everyday ferchrissakes!    ) we rode to Albany many times to protest the helmet laws.  Joan Claybrook (NHTSA) openly hated motorcycles and would've banned them if it were up to her.  Protest we did....but...THIS rider wouldn't ride helmetless.  I've got a few old Bells on the garage shelf with the sides either shattered or scraped through.

I work in an ICU at Long Island's largest hospital and often have to coordinate with organ donation staff.  They're heard to lament the helmet laws because the largest population of organ donors used to be the unhelmeted bikers lying in the 'vegetable garden'.

It's STILL not the gov't's responsibility to protect us from ourselves...despite the seemingly logical argument of insurance and societal costs of head trauma.

Billster  

[PeteSC]

I don't see any people marching on the State Capitals over the seat belt laws....or any major organizations formed with the intent of repealing the seat belt laws.

  A lot of laws are annoying.  I think the helmet thing is a 'hot button', since there's NO gray area.  You're either wearing a helmet, or you're not.
 It's not like speeding, where you can get away with a little bit.....or seat belts, where you're kind of concealed in the car, and sometimes it's not real obvious if you're wearing one or not.....
   Most cops can look at a rider not wearing a helmet, and figure out he's not wearing a helmet!